Guidelines for Reviewers 2023


These guidelines have been prepared to guide reviewers through the ECP 2023 abstract reviewing process.  All abstracts will be blind reviewed by at least two reviewers.

These guidelines also confirm how the external independent reviewers are identified and what role they play in the evaluation process. If you have any questions or any difficulties with your allocation, please inform us immediately at [email protected] and we can discuss the options available.

You will be sent (or may already have been sent) an email with a link for you to access your allocated submissions. This email will be from: “Rhianna Fitzgerald”  with the subject line “Invitation to review abstract for ECP 2023”. Please note that the review portal will hold the abstracts and symposiums you have been allocated at this time. Not all papers will be assigned at once and you may receive additional emails asking you to login and review.

Once you have clicked on the link in the email you will arrive at the page below. Your email address will be auto filled in the account email section. You will need to create an account password, once you have done this, please press the “Next” button.

All reviewers will need to create an account in the first instance. Once you have created an account you will be able to login to the portal throughout the reviewing process using your email address and password.

Once you are logged in to your account, you will need to press “click here” which will lead you to your assigned submissions for review.

Please note that once you have created an account you will automatically be taken to this page when you next login. Once you press the “Click here” button you will be asked to enter the email address and password for your account to access the portal.  


At the bottom of the Abstracts page, you will see all the submissions that you have been allocated. 

You also have the option to filter by “Presentation type” or by “Theme”. To start the review process please click on the button “View” next to the submission.


Conflict of interest
Peer- reviewers should not be put in a situation where they are assigned to review their own submission – this is a first author conflict.

The abstracts are reviewed by at least two reviewers, so we are looking only for the first author conflict.  Should you see that you have a further conflict of interest regarding an abstract (eg a relationship with one of the authors) or that it is not in your area of expertise, please do not hesitate to contact us. Please inform the ECP 2023 Scientific Programme Manager ([email protected]) that you are not able to review the abstract and they will decide on the next steps.  

All reviewers for ECP 2023 will be selected from the list of the experts that signed-up for the role through the ECP 2023 Call for reviewers. There are 21 Thematic Streams/Areas where each group of experts will be assigned based on their area/s of expertise. The reviewers in each Thematic Stream will be assigned to a group and a Team leader/Supervisor will be appointed to each group. The Team leader may be from the ECP 2023 Scientific Committee or a member of the relevant BPS Member Network Committee hosting a nested conference within ECP 2023. Please contact [email protected] if you need the contact information for your Team leader/Supervisor.

Please note: We have tried to allocate submissions according to your stated areas of interest but occasionally this has not been possible. If you feel you cannot review the submission, please contact us at [email protected] as soon as possible.

Evaluation process and evaluation criteria
Reviewers will work remotely and deliver their individual reviews via the ECP 2023 review system. During the individual review, there shall be no discussions of the proposals between the two assigned reviewers to ensure the independence of reviews. The reviewers will work with the evaluation criteria and the scoring matrix provided below. They will give scores between 1 and 5 for the overall abstract evaluation:

Abstract Scoring Scale –
points for the overall abstract review

Results Scoring Scale
– Combination of scores from different reviewers

Reject – the submission is not appropriate for ECP 2023

Re-Submit – the Submission in general is good but needs improvement to follow the Guidelines & Criteria of ECP 2023 submissions. Need to be re-worked and submitted as a new submission.

In every stage of the evaluation, confidentiality is of the utmost importance. All reviewers must respect confidentiality with respect to the applications. If you believe that additional scientific and technical expertise is needed to review an application, contact the Scientific Program Manager who will reassign the abstract to another reviewer. Respect for the privacy of the applicants’ ideas is also important. Misappropriation of intellectual property, including the unauthorized use of ideas or unique methods obtained from a privileged communication, such as a grant or manuscript review, is considered plagiarism and scientific misconduct.


Abstracts previously presented
An abstract which has been previously published or presented at a national, regional or international meeting can only be submitted if there are new methods, new findings, substantially updated information or other valid reasons for submitting that can be provided by the author.

Criteria for back-up reviewing

Abstracts that receive discrepant scores or an insufficient number of scores during the review period will be sent for further review to the Team leader/Supervisor.

Review Site 

A sample of what you see when you select a submission for review is shown below: 

To review the submission, you will need to click on each of the components in the menu on the left-hand side

Once you have been through each of the components and reviewed the information, the last option “Review Submission” will allow you to add your score and comments as seen on the screenshot below.

Once you are happy with your score and comments, please click on the completed check box. Once this has been done the “Update” button will turn green and the wording will change “Submit Completed Review”. Once you have clicked on the button “Submit Completed Review”, you will be taken back to your abstract review page where you will see a tick next to the paper that you have reviewed. 

You have the option to go in and edit your scores/comments until your review deadline.  At this point, any further amends will not be taken into consideration.


You will need to complete STEP 4 for each of the submissions you have been allocated.


Once all your reviews have been submitted and the reviewing period has finished, your marks and comments will be passed to the Programme Committee who will be in touch should there be any queries. If there are none, you will receive an email from [email protected] thanking you for participating in the process. 


Who should you contact for assistance? 

For any enquiry about using the online system, or the reviewing process itself, please contact [email protected]. For further information on the Thematic Streams and your Team leader/Supervisor please contact the Scientific Program Manager [email protected]


Thank you 

The Programme Committee thanks you for volunteering your time to review.