Reviewer Mentorship Program has been completed.

The ML4H 2023 reviewer mentorship program is now closed. We would like to thank the following mentors for their excellent work and invaluable contribution.

  • Bobak Mortazavi
  • Elena Sizikova
  • Harsha Vardhan
  • Hazrat Ali
  • Jennifer Williams
  • Jiacheng Zhu
  • Siun Kim
  • Jose Posada
  • Luca Romeo
  • Md Abdullah Al Hafiz Khan
  • Mehak Gupta
  • Melanie Fernandez
  • Michael Oberst
  • Neerav Karani
  • Niharika D'Souza
  • Pankaj Pandey
  • Eun-Kyeong Kim
  • Ping Wang
  • Ramya Tekumalla
  • Ridwan Alam
  • Sumit Mukherjee
  • Vishwa Parekh
  • Wenbin Zhang
  • Jun Wen
  • Xuhai Xu
  • Chris Brown
  • Laura Brattain
  • Yan Gao
  • Xiao Gu
  • Elena Sizikova
  • Hamed Javidi
  • Humera Tariq
  • Yi Liu

The full original call for the reviewer mentorship program is below.

Program Description

Join us for the Reviewer Mentorship Program, an ongoing ML4H initiative to train junior reviewers, foster new connections and relationships in the ML4H community, and ultimately improve the quality of the review process. This program revolves around two primary components: mentors providing constructive feedback on review drafts, and mentees refining their reviews based on this feedback.

If you are interested in participating in the reviewer mentorship program as a mentor/mentee please sign up using the following form form

Deadline: August 30th AoE, 2023.

Detailed Expectations


As a mentee, you will be expected to:

  1. Share the PDFs of your assigned papers with your mentor at the beginning of the review period.
  2. Share your review drafts with your mentor at least one week before the end of the review period (by September 24), facilitating ample time for discussion-driven revision.
  3. Schedule a video or phone call with your mentor to discuss the assigned papers and gather feedback on your reviews.
  4. Submit your review to OpenReview by October 5th.
  5. Carefully analyze author responses and other reviewer comments, participate actively in the reviewer discussion period, and make necessary updates to your reviews.
  6. Share the final version of your reviews with your mentor before the final submission.


As a mentor, you will be expected to:

  1. Thoroughly read the papers and the reviews shared by your mentee.
  2. Provide thoughtful, constructive feedback on the reviews. Your feedback should evaluate the scientific validity of the reviews and their adherence to reviewer guidelines and best practices.

Joint Expectations

Both mentors and mentees are required to:

  1. Determine a mutually agreed date and time to discuss the reviews before submitting to OpenReview by September 30th. Timeliness, thoroughness, and constructive feedback are paramount.
  2. Diligently read and discuss author feedback and other reviews prior to participating in the reviewer discussion period and submitting the final, updated review.


  • Prior to the review period (Before September 13th):
    • Mentees and mentors are matched by September 11.
    • Optionally, an introductory video or audio call can be scheduled on or before September 12th.
  • During the review period (September 13th - October 22nd):
    • Mentee shares assigned papers with mentor at the beginning of the review period (September 13th).
    • Mentee shares review drafts with mentor on or before September 28th.
    • Scheduled feedback session takes place between September 28 - October 5th.
    • Mentee incorporates feedback and submits the initial review to the system by October 5th.
    • The reviewer discussion period runs from October 13th - October 21st, during which mentee reads author responses and discusses them with the mentor and other reviewers. Review scores may be updated if needed.
    • Revised reviews are submitted by the mentee by October 22nd.
  • Following the review period:
    • Mentees and mentors should fill out a survey (by November 20) on the program's effectiveness, and suggestions for improvement.

Feedback Session Structure

Mentors have the flexibility to structure the feedback session as they prefer. However, they are expected to read their mentee's assigned papers and reviews, and formulate their feedback in advance. Rather than acting as an additional reviewer, mentors should focus on ensuring the mentee’s reviews are high-quality, constructive, and fair.


For assistance with the review process, please refer to the following resources: