Peer review is a fundamental component of scholarly publishing. It supports editors in making informed editorial decisions and helps authors improve the quality, clarity, and integrity of their work.
All reviews are conducted under a double-blind peer review model unless otherwise stated on the journal website.
Reviewers must provide independent, objective, and constructive evaluations based solely on scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance. Reviews should be conducted honestly and in good faith.
All manuscripts and associated materials must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use manuscript content for personal, academic, or commercial advantage.
Any real, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest must be disclosed to the editor. Reviewers should decline reviews where impartiality cannot be ensured.
Reviews must be fair, unbiased, and respectful. Personal criticism, discriminatory language, or hostile remarks are unacceptable.
Reviewers should complete reviews within the agreed timeframe and promptly notify editors of any delays or inability to complete the review. Reviewers who are unable to complete a review within the agreed timeframe should decline the invitation promptly.
Reviewer comments should be clear, evidence-based, and aimed at improving the manuscript. Requests for unnecessary citations or personal benefit are not permitted.
Reviewers should report suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, redundant publication, unethical research practices, or lack of ethical approval confidentially to the editor.
For manuscripts involving human participants, patient data, or sensitive information, reviewers should assess ethical approval, informed consent, and data protection compliance.
Manuscripts must not be uploaded into AI tools or external platforms. AI tools may only be used for language support without sharing confidential content. Reviewers remain fully responsible for their assessments.
Reviewers must not contact authors directly, attempt to influence editorial decisions outside the peer review system, or use their role for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewers may be consulted during appeal or dispute processes. Final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief.
The journal may acknowledge reviewer contributions through certificates, annual acknowledgments, or reviewer recognition platforms while maintaining confidentiality.
Confidentiality must be maintained after review submission. Reviewers should respond to editorial queries and inform editors of any newly identified conflicts.
These guidelines are informed by and aligned with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. The journal reserves the right to update these guidelines in accordance with evolving ethical standards.
List of the Journals
