Relevant expertise
Reviewers should have demonstrable academic, professional or technical expertise relevant to the specific paper or method.
Raeburn Institute research governance
External research peer review
A structured route for academics and experienced practitioners to challenge Institute methodologies before or after publication. External review strengthens evidence only when reviewer independence and the limits of the review are clear.
Conflict disclosure
Employment, advisory, vendor, client, financial and close personal conflicts relevant to the work must be declared before review.
Editorial independence
Reviewers may recommend changes, identify weaknesses or decline endorsement. Raeburn retains responsibility for the final publication and must not imply reviewer approval beyond what was explicitly agreed.
Attribution by consent
A reviewer's name, title, organisation, comments or logo are published only with explicit permission and agreed wording.
Review record
Material recommendations, author responses and changes should be logged. Where appropriate, publish a review statement or summary alongside the paper.
No paid praise
A review is not purchased endorsement. Any compensation, if ever offered, must be disclosed and must not depend on a favourable conclusion.
Current status
The programme and review standard are active. No external reviewer is listed until a real person accepts a review and consents to the relevant attribution.