Reviewer Guidlines

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. They may not be displayed or discussed with others except as permitted by the editors.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. The reviewer should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that the observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they discover irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, become aware of substantial similarities between manuscripts and concurrent submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that an error may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript; However

, the reviewer must have Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be carried out objectively and the reviewer must express his views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding the specific feedback required of them and unless there is a good reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors to improve their manuscripts. The reviewer should clarify any suggested additional investigations that are necessary to support the claims made in the text under consideration and which will only strengthen or expand the work.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts as having conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper. In the case of a double blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author, notify the journal if this knowledge raises a potential conflict of interest.

Accuracy: Reviewers must respond within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers only agree to review manuscripts if they are reasonably confident that they can return the review within a proposed or mutually agreed upon time frame, promptly notifying the journal if they require an extension. In the event that the reviewer finds it impossible for him to complete the manuscript review within the allotted time, this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to other reviewers.