- Reviewers must treat the review process as confidential and refrain from discussing the manuscript or its contents with anyone outside of the editorial process. This includes colleagues, students, or other individuals who are not directly involved in the review.
- Objectivity and Impartiality: Reviews should be conducted objectively and impartially, focusing on the scientific quality, originality, and significance of the research. Personal biases or conflicts of interest should not influence the evaluation process.
- Provide constructive feedback to authors, highlighting strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript and offering suggestions for improvement. Comments should be courteous, respectful, and aimed at helping authors enhance the quality of their work.
- Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the designated timeframe specified by the editorial office. Prompt feedback is essential for ensuring timely publication and maintaining the efficiency of the peer review process.
- Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality or perception of the manuscript. If a reviewer feels unable to provide an objective assessment due to a conflict of interest, they should decline the review assignment.
- Reviewers must respect the intellectual property rights of authors and refrain from using or disclosing any unpublished information obtained through the review process for personal gain or other purposes.
- Reviewers should ensure that manuscripts adhere to ethical standards and guidelines for research involving human subjects, animals, or other ethical considerations. Any ethical concerns should be raised with the editorial office.
- Reviewers are expected to conduct their reviews with honesty, integrity, and diligence. Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in the review process is unacceptable and undermines the credibility of scholarly peer review.
