Information for Reviewers

Current Oncology is always seeking qualified, dedicated reviewers to assist with the manuscript review process. Below you'll find information about becoming a reviewer and our guidelines. As a reviewer you will be asked to read and critique articles that are submitted to Current Oncology for publication. 

Why become a Reviewer?

  • Play an integral part in ensuring the high standards of the journal are met
  • Provide insight for our authors and help them strengthen their work
  • Stay on top of the most up-to-date research
  • Gain valuable experience in scientific publishing

How do I become a Reviewer for Current Oncology?

To become a reviewer for Current Oncology, you must register and create an account online with our manuscript submission and peer review system. If you already have an account, you must update your profile to register as a reviewer. If you do not have an account with Current Oncology, you will have to create one and register as a reviewer. Please see instructions below:


If you have previously created a user account (as a reader, author, and/or reviewer), please visit the Current Oncology website and login to your account.  Once you have signed in, click on “Edit my profile” under the heading “My Account”. Then, scroll down to “Roles”, select “Reviewer” and fill in your reviewing interests in the appropriate box near the bottom of the page.  Please ensure the box beside “Reviewer” is checked, or the system will not recognize you in that role.  If you have forgotten your username or password, please click here.


Please click here to create an account.  You will be taken to a form where you enter your information. Near the bottom of the form, select the “reviewer” check box under “register as” and identify your reviewing interests. You can only be a reviewer and submit manuscripts if you have an account with the Current Oncology website.


I am already a Reviewer, how do I update my Reviewing Interests?

We recommend that all reviewers update their profile frequently to ensure the system is up to date with their contact information and reviewing interests.  Keeping your reviewing interests up to date will ensure that you are being matched to manuscripts based on your expertise, and also improve your chances of being invited to review a manuscript.

Please visit the Current Oncology website and login to your user account.  Once you have signed in, click on “Edit my profile” under the heading “My Account” to review your profile.  To update your reviewing interests scroll down near the bottom of the page and fill in your interests in the box provided. Be sure to click “Save” to save the updates to your profile.

Reviewer Guidelines

Current Oncology and its editors, authors, and readers appreciate your willingness to review this manuscript and your dedication. We hope that these Guidelines will help make your job easier.


Our online peer review is a six step process:

  • Step 1 - Notify the submission's editor as to whether you will undertake the review (link provided in review request email).
  • Step 2 - If you accept to do the review, consult the Reviewer Guidelines.
  • Step 3 - Download the files associated with the submission.
  • Step 4 - Review the article; you will be asked to complete a Review Form or Open Text Form, depending on the submission type.
  • Step 5 (Optional) – uploading additional files for the editor and/or author to consult. To keep the integrity of a blind review, ensure your name is not present within the file.
  • Step 6 - Select a recommendation and submit the review to complete the process. You must enter a review or upload a file before selecting a recommendation. This step must be done for your review to show as complete within the system.


Authors submit their manuscripts electronically via Open Journal Systems (OJS) to Current Oncology. Each manuscript is reviewed by the Editor or Managing Editor for relevancy to Current Oncology and the section to which it was submitted. If retained, the manuscript is assigned to an editor, who in turn chooses one or more editorial board members or reviewers to review it. A Reviewer will receive an email requesting them to complete a review.  Please view our Peer Review Policy at

Upon receipt of the request to review, you should immediately:

  • Read the editor's transmittal e-mail, which includes the article abstract, to determine whether the subject is within your area of expertise and whether you can complete the review in the stated time period.
  • Visit the SUBMISSION URL provided in the Review Request email and accept or decline the invitation to review (Step 1 of the Review Process).

If you decline the request to review:

  • Indicate why you are declining.
  • If possible, please suggest a colleague who may be able to review the manuscript. If appropriate, the editor will send an invitation to review to that individual. You may not “transfer” your invitation to review the manuscript to a colleague.

If you accept the request to review:

    • Immediately double-check the manuscript to determine whether there is any conflict of interest for you.
    • If you have either a time problem or a conflict of interest, contact the assigning editor for instructions. The editor may extend your deadline or cancel the review assignment as appropriate.


Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.

Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript if the potential for bias exists.  As stated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), reviewers should “declare any potentially conflicting or competing interests (which may, for example, be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious), seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.”

Do not discuss the paper with its authors either during or after the review process. Although it may seem natural and reasonable to discuss points of difficulty or disagreement directly with an author, especially if you are generally in favour of publication and do not mind revealing your identity, this practice is prohibited because the other reviewer and the editor may have different opinions, and the author may be misled by having "cleared things up" with the reviewer who contacted him/her directly.

The manuscript provided to you for review is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Do not cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published and do not use the information that it contains for the advancement of your own research or in discussions with colleagues.


Overall Comments about the Review

Current Oncology employs two review formats.  For the majority of articles, a reviewer will be asked to complete a web-based “Review Form”. For all other articles you will be asked to enter your review in two open text boxes, the first "for author and editor," and the second "for editor”.  

In your overall comments about the article intended for the author, do not make statements about the acceptability of a paper; suggested revisions should be stated as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Adopt a positive, impartial, but critical attitude toward the manuscript under review, with the aim of promoting effective, accurate, and relevant scientific communication. Organize your review so that an introductory paragraph summarizes the major findings of the article, gives your overall impression of the paper, and highlights the major shortcomings. This paragraph should be followed by specific, numbered comments, which, if appropriate, may be subdivided into major and minor points. (The numbering facilitates both the editor's letter to the author and evaluation of the author's rebuttal.). If you are asked to complete your review via an online Review Form (see below), there is no need to duplicate your comment in the overall comments to the author, if you already entered comments within the specific category. Criticism should be presented dispassionately; offensive remarks are not acceptable.

Confidential remarks directed to the editor should be entered in the box labelled “For the Editor.”

Review Format A – Review Form

A review form must be completed by all reviewers for the following article types*:

  • Original Articles
  • Review Articles
  • Perspectives in Oncology
  • Short Communication
  • Case Reports
  • Practice Guidelines (when applicable)

As a reviewer, you will be asked to rate the article on the following criteria below.

  • Originality
  • Significance
  • Adequacy of title and abstract
  • Methodology and Design
  • Results
  • Soundness of conclusions and interpretation
  • References
  • Appropriateness of tables
  • Appropriateness of figures
  • Writing Quality
  • Organization
  • Adherence to the Instructions to Authors
  • Adherence to journal's Ethical Policies
  • Publication Priority

In addition to providing ratings based on the categories outlined, all reviewers are asked to enter comments explaining their ratings, so the author understands how to correct. There is a space to enter specific comments for each above category, overall comments for the author, and comments specific for the editor.

Review Format B – Open Text

For all other articles (not listed under Review Format A) the reviewer must enter their review in two open text boxes, the first "for author and editor," and the second "for editor."  
Please consider the following aspects when reviewing a manuscript where applicable.

  • Significance to the Oncology field
  • Originality
  • Appropriateness of the approach or evaluation/assessment
  • Appropriateness of the statistical analyses
  • Adherence to correct scientific nomenclature
  • Appropriate literature citations
  • Adequacy of experimental techniques or pedagogical approach
  • Soundness of conclusions and interpretation
  • Organization
  • Adherence to the Instructions to Authors
  • Adherence to journal's Ethical Policies
  • Adequacy of title and abstract
  • Appropriateness of figures and tables
  • Length


After completing your review, click the Submit Review button (Step 6). You will also be asked to select your recommendation (via a pull down menu) in the final step of the review process. The recommendation options are as follows:

  • Accept: Accept paper in its present form, there is no need for author to submit a revision. Some minor copyediting may be necessary, but this can be caught at the copyediting stage.
  • Revisions Required: The manuscript requires minor content and/or editorial changes before it’s suitable for publication. Revised manuscripts do not require a second round of review by the reviewers.
  • Resubmit for Review: The paper contains one or more serious problems, and if corrected might result in a generally acceptable manuscript. Resubmitted manuscripts typically are reviewed again by the section editors and reviewers.
  • Resubmit Elsewhere: The content of the manuscript does not fit the scope of the journal, but may be suited for another publication. 
  • Decline Submission: The content, style, and/or preparation of the manuscript are flawed to the extent that it is unlikely that revisions can render the manuscript suitable for publication.

Reviewer's recommendations are gratefully received by the editor; however, since editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, reviewers should not expect the editor to honour every recommendation. You will be asked to suggest acceptability as noted on the specific review form (e.g., accept; revisions required (accept after minor revisions); decline submission; resubmission required).

Need Technical Assistance?

For assistance with creating or logging into your account or submitting your review, please contact Patricia Mangahis by phone to 905-875-2456, toll free 888-834-1001 or by email to