Wavejo - Revolutionizing Scholarly Communication with Open Access Excellence!

Reviewer Guidelines and Key Review Items:

Journal Name:		Manuscript Number:
Title of the Manuscript:		Type of the Article:

Reviewer Guidelines

General Guideline for Peer Review Process:

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the executive editors. The primary role of reviewers is to determine whether the submitted work is scientifically sound and reasonable concerning methodology, argument, conclusions, and proper positioning of the work within the existing literature on the subject and related areas.
Reviewers are asked to provide concrete, constructive, and substantiated comments and reflections to assist the editors in making a final decision regarding the publication of the manuscript and to assist the author in improving the manuscript so it can be published.

Key Review Items to Consider:

Review Item	Reviewer’s Considerations	Reviewer’s Comment	Author’s Comment *(if agreed with the reviewer, correct the manuscript and highlight that part in the manuscript.* *it is mandatory that authors write their feedback here)*
Scope of the Journal	Evaluate if the manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope.
Serious Flaws	Assess if any significant issues would disqualify the manuscript from publication.
Methodology Description	Check if the methodology is thoroughly described, ensuring the results can be reproduced.
Data and Methodology Soundness	Determine the reliability of the data and the appropriateness of the methods used.
Need for Additional Data or Experiments	Consider if additional data or experiments are required for a comprehensive evaluation.
Originality and Literature Positioning	Review the originality of the work and its relevance within the current literature.
Substantiation of Discussion and Conclusions	Verify if the discussion and conclusions are supported by the data and evidence provided.
Consideration of Future Actions	Assess whether the discussion includes potential actions or implications based on the research findings.
References to Similar Research	Ensure that relevant references to similar research are included.
Clarity and Organization	Evaluate if the writing and organization of the paper are clear and if the English is correct.
Tables and Figures	Determine if tables and figures are appropriate and effectively convey the intended information
Ethical or Competing Interests	Identify any ethical concerns or competing interests known to the reviewer.

PART 1: Review Comments:

Comment Type	Reviewer’s Comment	Author’s Comment (if agreed with the reviewer, correct the manuscript and highlight that part in the manuscript. It is mandatory that authors write their feedback here)
Compulsory REVISION comments
Minor REVISION comments
Optional/General comments

PART 2: Ethical Issues:

Reviewer’s Comment	Author’s Comment (if agreed with reviewer, correct the manuscript and highlight that part in the manuscript. It is mandatory that authors write their feedback here)
Are there ethical issues in this manuscript? (If yes, kindly please write down the ethical issues here in details)

Reviewer Details:

Name:
Department, University & Institute Country:

Name:

Department,

University & Institute

Country:

Review Guidelines

Useful Links

Login

Follow Us