Review Workflow — Rubrics, Reviewers & Submissions

The review workflow ensures fair, structured evaluation of every abstract submission. Build rubrics with weighted criteria, assign reviewers, and track review progress.

Configure Rubrics

Go to Settings → Rubric to build your evaluation criteria.

Create Evaluation Criteria

1. Go to Settings → Rubric.
2. Click + Add Criteria.
3. Choose the criteria type:
   • Scale — numeric rating (e.g., 1–5 or 1–10)
   • Multiple Choice — select from predefined options
   • Yes / No — binary evaluation
   • Text — free-form text feedback
4. Fill in:
   • Title — criteria name (e.g., “Originality”, “Methodology”, “Relevance”)
   • Description — what the reviewer should evaluate
   • Weight — percentage weight in the final score (all weights should sum to 100%)
   • Required — whether the reviewer must complete this criteria
5. Configure type-specific settings:
   • Scale: Min value, max value, min label (“Poor”), max label (“Excellent”)
   • Multiple Choice: Define options list
   • Yes/No: Points for Yes, points for No
6. Click Save.

Example Rubric

Criteria	Type	Weight	Scale
Originality	Scale	25%	1–10 (Poor → Exceptional)
Methodology	Scale	25%	1–10 (Weak → Rigorous)
Relevance to Theme	Scale	20%	1–10 (Off-topic → Highly Relevant)
Clarity of Writing	Scale	15%	1–10 (Unclear → Crystal Clear)
Potential Impact	Scale	15%	1–10 (Minimal → Transformative)

Tip

Use rubric templates to get started quickly. Click the template icon to browse pre-built rubrics for common conference types — academic, industry, poster sessions, etc.

Reorder Criteria

Drag criteria to reorder them. Reviewers see criteria in the order you set.

Preview Rubric

Click Preview to see the rubric exactly as reviewers will see it. Verify that instructions are clear and the scoring makes sense.

---

Manage Reviewers

Go to Settings → Reviewers.

Add a Reviewer

1. Click + Add Reviewer.
2. Fill in:
   • Name — reviewer’s full name
   • Email — for sending review assignments and notifications
   • Role — Reviewer, Lead Reviewer, Technical Reviewer, or Panel Reviewer
   • Designation — job title
   • Company — organization
   • Description — expertise areas
   • Photo — profile image
3. Optionally enable Social Media links (LinkedIn, etc.).
4. Click Save.

AI-Powered Reviewer Import

Save time by importing reviewer profiles from LinkedIn:

1. Click Fetch from LinkedIn.
2. Paste the reviewer’s LinkedIn profile URL.
3. The system auto-fills name, designation, company, description, and photo.
4. Review and save.

Reviewer Roles

Role	Responsibility
Reviewer	Evaluates assigned submissions using the rubric
Lead Reviewer	Senior reviewer — may have final say on borderline submissions
Technical Reviewer	Evaluates technical accuracy and methodology
Panel Reviewer	Reviews for specific tracks or panels

---

Manage Submissions

Go to Settings → Submissions to see all submitted abstracts.

Submission Status

Status	Meaning
Pending	Submitted, waiting for review assignment
Under Review	Reviewers assigned, evaluation in progress
Reviewed	All assigned reviewers have completed their evaluation
Approved	Accepted — submitter notified
Rejected	Declined — submitter notified
Revision Requested	Submitter asked to revise and resubmit

Assign Reviewers to a Submission

1. Open a submission.
2. Click Assign Reviewers.
3. Select reviewers from your reviewer list.
4. Each selected reviewer receives an email notification (if enabled).
5. Reviewers log in to the reviewer portal to evaluate.

Conflict Detection

If Flag Conflicts is enabled and two reviewers’ scores differ by more than the threshold (e.g., one gives 9/10, another gives 5/10), the system flags the submission for organizer review.

---

Best Practices

• Weight criteria thoughtfully — originality and relevance should typically carry more weight than writing style for research conferences.
• Use blind review for fairness — especially for competitive academic conferences where reviewer bias could be an issue.
• Set a realistic review period — give reviewers 2–3 weeks to complete evaluations. Send reminders 3 days before the deadline.
• Assign odd number of reviewers — 3 reviewers per submission makes tie-breaking easier than 2.
• Test the full workflow — submit a test abstract, assign yourself as a reviewer, complete the evaluation, and verify the scoring and notification workflow.