Reviewer Guidelines

  1. Confidentiality: The manuscript being reviewed should be considered a confidential document. It should not be shared with or discussed with others without prior permission from the editor.
  2. Conflict of interest: If the reviewer has a conflict of interest with the authors or the content of the manuscript, they should decline to review it.
  3. Timeliness: The reviewer should return their review to the editor within the specified timeframe.
  4. Standards of objectivity: The review should be conducted objectively and should not be influenced by personal feelings or beliefs. The review should be constructive and respectful.
  5. Criteria for content review: The review should address the following criteria:
    • the Abstract is part of the review; as it is the first section of any article, it should be succinct and match the overall content of the article and encourage the reader to read through the entire article
    • significance and originality of the research
    • methodology and execution
    • validity of the conclusions
    • appropriateness of the references cited
    • readability and organization of the manuscript
  6. Comments to the authors: The reviewer should provide specific and constructive feedback to the authors on how they can improve their manuscript.
  7. Recommendation: The reviewer should recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected, and provide a rationale for their decision.
  8. Identify any other issues such as Plagiarism issues
  9. Please refer to the Responsibility of Reviewers section of the JMUST Ethics and Malpractice Statement for details of reviewer responsibilities