Reviewer Guideline

Compliance with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers is a priority for all reviewers.

The primary purpose of peer review is providing the Editor with the information needed to reach a fair, evidence-based decision that adheres to the journal’s editorial criteria. Review reports should also help authors revise their paper such that it may be accepted for publication. Reports accompanied by a recommendation to reject the paper should explain the major weaknesses of the research; this will help the authors prepare their manuscript for submission to a different journal.

Peer reviewers should assess papers exclusively against the journal’s criteria for publication.

The following conventions should be respected:

Reviewers should review the peer review policy of the Journal before revealing their reviewer role.

Reviews should be conducted objectively.

 Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate, as are defamatory/libelous remarks.

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references.

Reviewers should declare any potential competing interests.

 Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts with which they believe they have a competing interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of material supplied to them and not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work.

Any reviewer who wants to pass a peer review invitation onto a colleague must contact the journal in the first instance.

Concerns relating to these points, or any aspect of the review process, should be raised with the editorial team.