Peer reviewers are essential to the scientific process, and we very much appreciate our HCMR reviewers. Articles published in a journal such as HCMR are usually reviewed by an editor and three peer reviewers in a double-blind process (i.e., the reviewers do not know who the authors are, and the authors do not know who the reviewers are). People who agree to review manuscripts are providing a significant service not only to the journal, but also to the authors and the scientific community at large. Sometimes a manuscript is of such high quality upon submission that it requires very little of the reviewers' effort and time, but most of the time even very high-quality papers benefit from close review and constructive feedback from others who are experts in the area of the author's research. Reviewers, editors, and authors don't always agree on what needs to be done to improve a paper; however, in most cases reviewers' suggestions make a paper better. The best reviews are polite and constructive in their tone, and point out a manuscript's positive aspects along with the areas for improvement. Admittedly, this can take some practice on the reviewer's part. Sometimes it is difficult to find constructive suggestions for procedures or statistics that are poorly explained, or hypotheses with unclear rationale. Reviewers' opinions about a study's contribution to the literature are essential. Often reviewers can identify a key citation that is missing from a paper's literature review, and even provide specific reference details. A good review focuses on determining if a manuscript's theoretical framework is clearly articulated, and if the research questions or hypotheses logically flow from it. HCMR is somewhat unique among health care journals in that we do require clear theoretical underpinning for empirical studies. A good review then examines the study's methods to determine if they are appropriate for the research questions, and points out any clarification that might be needed so that readers can assess the validity of methods and inferences drawn from the study. If a study's methods have a fatal flaw, constructive reviews make suggestions about how the method could be improved as the authors move forward with their work. Finally, constructive reviews evaluate the extent to which the manuscript makes good suggestions for future research, and for HCMR, the extent to which the author has translated the study's scholarly findings into practical implications. Even if editors had the time to carefully review and provide feedback for every manuscript that is submitted for publication, we still rely on the expertise and thoughtful suggestions made by our reviewers. And we are especially grateful for the wonderful HCMR reviewers who have provided this service since 2020, given that the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted so many lives, jobs, and families. We thank these reviewers and acknowledge their efforts on the following page(s).

Abdulsalam, Yousef

Ahmad, Raheelah

Al-Amin, Mona

Anderson, Ekaterina

Andrews, Diane

Anthony, Denise

Baird, Aaron

Barnes, Hilary

Barton, Michelle

Beauvais, Brad

Begun, James

Bhat, Vasanthakumar

Birken, Sarah

Blakeney, Erin

Boden, Matthew

Botting, Ingrid

Brooks, Joanna

Brown, E. Sherwood

Brunetto, Yvonne

Brusoni, Manuela

Bui, Linh

Buttigieg, Sandra

Byrne, John-Paul

Carroll, Nathan

Chilingerian, Jon

Chreim, Samia

Compagni, Amelia

Cordasco, Kristina

Coustasse, Alberto

Cronin, Cory

Dalton, Christina

Dandi, Roberto

DeLellis, Nailya

DePuccio, Matthew

DiVincenzo, Fausto

Dill, Janette

Djukic, Maja

Duncan, Carrie

Elten, Hilco

Everson, Jordan

Fareed, Naleef

Flieger, Signe

Frich, Jan

Fuji, Kevin

Garvin, Lynn

Gillis, William

Gilmartin, Mattia

Gittell, Jody

Gitto, Simone

Goodall, Amanda

Greenfield, David

Gregory, Megan

Halbesleben, Jonathon

Hansen, Claus

Harenstam, Karin

Harless, David

Harrison, Michael

Hartmann, Christine

He, Mengying

Hefner, Jennifer

Hoff, Timothy

Hogan, Tory

Holmgren, A. Jay

Hopkins, Margaret

Huang, Huang

Hurley, Vanessa

Ishqaidef, Ghadir

Jacobs, Laurie

Jegers, Marc

Jiang, Joanna

Johnson, Susan

Johnson, Christopher

Katz-Navon, Tal

Kilroy, Steven

Kim, Jungyoon

King, Robyn

King, Melissa

Kjellstrom, Sofia

Kreindler, Sara

Krumm, Andrew

Kuusio, Hannamaria

Landry, Amy

Lee, Shoou-Yih

Lee, Yuna

Leeman, Jennifer

Lemak, Christy

Lewis, Steven

Liang, Su-Ying

Liberatore, Florian

Lilius, Jacoba

Lin, Blossom

Lin, Sunny

Longo, Francesco

Lord, Justin

MacKinnon, William

MacPhee, Maura

Markossian, Talar

Mazurenko, Olena

McCaughey, Deirdre

McClelland, Laura

McCullough, J. Mac

McCurdy, Rodney

McFadden, Kathleen

Menachemi, Nir

Mohr, David

Morgan, Jennifer

Nigam, Amit

Nyaga, Gilbert

O'Connor, Stephen

Ong, Mei-Sing

Opoku-Agyeman, William

Orzano, A.

Ozaydin, Bunyamin

Ozgen Narci, Hacer

Paul, Jomon

Porter, Tracy

Raffenaud, Amanda

Ramamonjiarivelo, Zo

Rangachari, Pavani

Ranucci, Rebecca

Rattinger, Gail

Rendle, Katharine

Richter, Jason

Rinne, Seppo

Rittenhouse, Diane

Rivard, Peter

Rundall, Thomas

Sales, Anne

Scholle, Sarah

Schoor, Megan

Schultz, Carsten

Shay, Patrick

Sheard, Laura

Silvera, Geoffrey

Sinervo, Timo

Singer, Sara

Singh, Simone

Sorra, Joann

Spaulding, Aaron

Stiehl, Emily

Stock, Gregory

Stults, Cheryl

Sullivan, Jennifer

Tietschert, Maike

Touati, Nassera

Van der Kolk, Berend

Van Eijk, Carola

Vardaman, James

Vaughn, Thomas

Vest, Joshua

Walker, Daniel

Wallace, Lauren

Walsh, Michael

Wang, Virginia

Weech-Maldonado, Robert

Wells, Rebecca

Westra, Daan

Whitman, Marilyn

Williams, Eric

Winter, Vera

Wittland, Michael

Wu, Frances

Yeager, Valerie

Yount, Naomi

Yuan, Christina

Zuberi, Daniyal