Peer Reviewers’
Guidelines
Peer reviewers must ensure that
they
answer the following questions in their report:
o
In
general, is the paper easy to follow and does it have a logical flow?
o
Does
the English grammar, punctuation or spelling need to be corrected?
o
Does
the paper fit the aims and scope of the journal? (Each journal has an
"Aims and Scope" link on the upper right of its home page).
o
Do
the title and abstract cover the main aspects of the work?
o
Are
the results novel? Does the study provide an advance in the field?
o
Did
the study gain ethical approval appropriate to the country in which the
research was performed if human or animal subjects were involved and is
it
stated in the manuscript?
o
Are
the methods clear and replicable?
o
Is
the statistical analysis appropriate to the study design?
o
Are
the controls appropriate for the study design?
o
Do
all the results presented match the methods described?
o
Is
the data clearly and appropriately presented using clear language?
o
Did
the authors make the underlying data available to the readers?
o
Do
the conclusions correlate to the results found?
o
Does
the paper raise any ethical concerns?
o Are images appropriate for the article? If there are any concerns about duplication or manipulation in images, please raise potential issues by email or in your report. Please refer to our image manipulation policy.
Conflict of Interest
“Conflict
of interest (COI) exists when there is a divergence between an
individual’s
private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities
to
scientific and publishing activities such that a reasonable observer
might
wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated
by considerations
of his or her competing interests” WAME.
”Reviewers
should declare their conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from
the
peer-review process if a conflict exists”. ICMJE
Confidentiality
Manuscripts
are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole
purpose of
critical evaluation. Reviewers should ensure that the review processes
is
confidential. Details of the manuscript and the review process should
remain
confidential during and after the review process.
Review reports
In
evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on the following:
•
Originality
•
Contribution to the field
•
Technical quality
•
Clarity of presentation
•
Depth of research
Reviewers
should also:
•
Observe that the author(s) have followed the
instruction for authors, editorial policies and publication ethics.
• Observe that the appropriate journal’s
reporting guidelines is followed
The
report should be accurate, objective, constructive and unambiguous.
Comments should be backed by facts and constructive arguments
with
regards to the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should avoid using
“hostile, derogatory and accusatory
comments”.
Timeliness
Reviewers
should only accept manuscript that they are confident that they can
dedicate
appropriate time in reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return
manuscripts in a timely manner.
Reviewers’
recommendation should be either:
- Accept
• Requires minor
corrections
• Requires
moderate revision
• Requires major
revision
• Not suitable
for the journal. Submit to another publication such as (suggest a
journal):
• Reject
Recommendation
should be backed with constructive arguments and facts based on the
content of
the manuscript.
•
COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer
Reviewers
•
ICMJE - Responsibilities in the
Submission and Peer-Review Process