The primary task of a peer-reviewer is to provide the Editorial Board with a direct recommendation regarding a publication (rejection, acceptance, minor or major revision) based on an impartial but critical assessment of the manuscript. This recommendation should lie on both the significance and conclusiveness of the manuscript. Criticisms are expected to be constructive with no hint of prejudice or use of offensive language. Importantly, the reviewer should include a justified explanation of the manuscript’s strengths, minor and major weaknesses as well as suggestions to eliminate them, so that the authors can understand why their manuscript has been rejected or why there is a need of revision.
Reviewers may not use the unpublished information described in manuscripts they are reviewing as resources for their own research interests and should protect this information from any form of exploitation. In addition, reviewers must preserve the confidentiality of unpublished work, prevent their unauthorized access by storing it in a secure manner, and not share it with other colleagues. Reviewers must be aware that any manuscript or abstract sent for peer-review is a confidential document and remains so until it is formally published.
To make sure that no important issue was missed in your analysis, you may find enclosed our Paper Review Check List and use it as a plan composing your report or just fill it in and e-mail to your Editor.
Paper Review Check List: