NOTE:  New submissions are being processed via Editorial Manager (manuscript numbers beginning with AA-D-08).  Manuscripts submitted to Rapid Review will continue to be handled on that system. Please contact the editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org for technical assistance.

Welcome to the Reviewer's page. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of ANESTHESIA & ANALGESIA.

This section is still being developed. In particular, the Guide for Reviewers has not yet been written. However, please note several items related to your review activities for ANESTHESIA & ANALGESIA:

We strive to get decision letters back to authors within 6 weeks. This means that reviewers should try to get their reviews back to the journal within 3 weeks if possible.If there will be substantial delay, please contact the relevant (Section) Editor to let them know.

Please be as rigorous and critical as possible in your reviews. The authors, and ultimately our patients, benefit from your efforts honing the author's submission to be as precise, well supported, clearly documented, and scientifically sound as possible. However, please be kind, thoughtful, respectful, and gracious. That is the public tone of ANESTHESIA & ANALGESIA. We want that tone to characterize all interactions associated with the journal, particularly those with our authors.

Encourage authors to keep their discussions brief. If you believe that an important work has not been cited that helps put the author's findings into perspective, then by all means point this out. However, we aren't looking for mini-reviews of the field in every discussion. Like Science and Nature, we want authors to focus on what they did (Methods), and what they saw (Results). The discussion should be limited to just enough review of the literature to place the current results in context.

I encourage signed reviews. For years I signed my own reviews. My own belief is that signed reviews provide the same rigor of evaluation, but improve the civility and efficiency of the peer review process. It also gives the authors an opportunity to say "We disagree with Dr. Shafer. This isn't his area of expertise."

You will receive a copy of the decision letter sent to the author, as well as the comments of the other reviewers. I encourage your reviewing the comments of the other reviewers. The confidential comments and reviewer names are also shared among reviewers. This permits you to see both the "public" comments that the author sees, and the "confidential" concerns that may also influence manuscript acceptance. Remember that your peers in the review process will see your name and confidential comments, so these should be thoughtful and respectful as well.

Thank you for visiting the Reviewer's page. I apologize that the Guide for Reviewers is not yet available. However, like a good review, we'll be getting to it any day now.

I welcome your feedback.

sshafer{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org
Editor in Chief