Reviewer Guidelines

Guidance:

1. Confidentiality:

•Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. Reviewers must not disclose any details about the manuscript or its review process to anyone except the editorial team.

2. Acknowledgement of Sources:

•Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge must be immediately brought to the editor’s notice.

3. Standards of Objectivity:

•Review of submitted manuscripts must be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

4. Promptness:

•If a reviewer feels it is not possible to complete the review of a manuscript within the stipulated time, this information must be communicated to the editor promptly so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

5. Conflict of Interest:

•Reviewers should avoid conflicts of interest. If there is any potential for conflict of interest, reviewers should disclose it to the editor and recuse themselves from the review process if necessary.

6. Accuracy:

•Reviewers are expected to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should also ensure that the references are accurate and appropriate.

7. Constructive Feedback:

•Reviewers should provide constructive feedback that can help authors improve their manuscripts. Critiques should be specific, detailed, and supported by evidence.

8. Ethical Issues:

•Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript and report any concerns to the editor. This includes any suspicion of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or any other form of unethical behavior.

 

Competing Interest:

We believe that in the management of scientific journals, conflicts of interest and subjective judgments will always exist, but to produce the best work, we highly value the professional performance of everyone involved in this journal. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could bias their review of a manuscript. This includes any personal, financial, intellectual, or professional connections that could influence their judgment. Reviewers should not review manuscripts authored or co-authored by individuals with whom they have a close personal relationship or with whom they have recently collaborated. Financial interests, such as funding or employment from organizations that might gain or lose financially from the publication, should be disclosed. Any strong intellectual or ideological beliefs that may impact the ability to provide an impartial review should also be reported. All disclosed conflicts of interest will be handled confidentially by the editorial team, used solely to determine the reviewer’s ability to provide an unbiased review. By adhering to these guidelines, reviewers help maintain the integrity and fairness of the peer review process.

 

Review Form Submission:

Reviewers must fill out the provided form after completing their review to ensure all guidelines have been followed and to formally document their review and any potential competing interests.