For reviewers

Conflicts of Interest

Global Medical Reviews uses double-anonymized external peer review for scholarly articles. Reviewers assess both the main manuscript and relevant supplementary materials. Recommendations are advisory; the handling editor and, where required, the Editor-in-Chief make the final decision.

Conflicts that normally require declining

Financial benefit linked to the outcome.
Co-authorship with a presumed author during the previous three years.
Current or recent supervisor–student or mentor–mentee relationship.
Current close collaboration, shared grant, commercial project or institutional dependency.
Close personal relationship, hostility or significant academic rivalry.
Direct involvement in a competing manuscript or product.

Uncertain situations

A perceived conflict can be as important as an actual conflict. Describe the relationship to the editor before gaining access to the full files. The editor may clear the assignment, seek clarification or replace the reviewer.