Guidelines for Reviewers of New Educational Resources

Part of JNEB's mission is to provide its readers with accurate, timely, and useful reviews of nutrition and health-related resources for personal or professional selection and recommendation. When a new resource is submitted and deemed appropriate for JNEB, the Reviews Editor invites an SNE member or guest reviewer to evaluate the material and write a review of the material. For these authors, we have developed the following guidelines:

General Format

  1. Start your review with the bibliographic data provided in the proposal information sheet, exactly as it appears there and single spaced.
  2. Skip one line and insert the italicized abstract provided in the proposal information sheet.
  3. Double-space the body of your review, using a 12-point font and 1-inch margins. Apply consecutive line numbers to the document, beginning with page 1 (this feature can be found under the "Layout" tab of "Page Setup" in most versions of Microsoft Word).
  4. Aim for a length of 350 to 500 words; 500 words is the maximum.
  5. If you refer to other publications, citations should follow the system described in the American Medical Association Manual of Style (10th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007).
  6. LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE REVIEW: End the review with your name, degree(s) and certification(s), title and/or affiliation, and mailing address, including zip code.
  7. Submit your review to your account in the Elsevier Editorial System (ees.elsevier.com/jneb) under “My Accepted Invitations”.

Content

  1. Try to attract the reader's attention in the opening paragraph making a declarative statement or placing the book in the context of current trends and interests.
  2. Summarize and evaluate the material (about 20% of your review should summarize, and about 80% should evaluate).
  3. Your summary should include, but not be limited to:
    • An overview of the content and subjects covered.
    • A description of the intended audience.
    • Mention of anything unique about the format, use of graphics, etc.
  4. Your evaluation should include, but should not be limited to:
    • Commendation of strengths and tactful criticism of weaknesses, with examples.
    • Assessment of timeliness, originality, accuracy, organization, readability, usefulness, references, graphics and/or appropriateness for intended audience.
    • Suggestion of specific improvement(s), if appropriate.
    • Website reviews should remark on the experience as a user navigating the website, indicating particular sections/pages emphasized (if applicable), if only a portion of the website is evaluated; also note pertinent hyperlinks.
  5. Avoid direct quotes, except for very short phrases.
  6. In your closing remarks, include comments about the overall soundness or usefulness of the material. Briefly (one or two sentences) describe how it could be used by JNEB’s readers and in what setting(s). If appropriate, state the specific type(s) of nutrition professional(s) the material would be best suited for.

Your review will be edited for length, clarification, accuracy and consistency, if necessary. It will be returned to you for revisions, if necessary.

Thank you for your contribution to JNEB.