Scope of Review

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts strictly within their area of expertise. If a submission falls outside the reviewer’s competence, the reviewer should inform the editorial office and decline the invitation.

Before Accepting a Review

Reviewers should confirm:

1. Adequate subject knowledge

2. Availability to complete the review within the assigned timeframe

3. Absence of any conflicts of interest

If these conditions are not met, the review invitation should be declined promptly.

Review Timeline

Reviewers are generally expected to submit their evaluation within 10–14 days from the date of acceptance of the review invitation. Extensions may be requested when necessary.

Key Aspects to Evaluate

Reviewers should assess the manuscript with respect to:

1. Relevance to the journal’s scope

2. Originality and contribution to knowledge

3. Scientific validity and methodological rigor

4. Ethical approval and consent, where applicable

5. Clarity, structure, and language quality

6. Appropriateness and completeness of references

Structure of the Review Report

Reviewers are encouraged to structure their comments as follows:

• General comments: Overall assessment of the manuscript
• Major comments: Substantial issues requiring attention
• Minor comments: Typographical, stylistic, or formatting suggestions

Providing Constructive Feedback

Comments should be objective, specific, and focused on improving the manuscript. Personal criticism, derogatory language, or subjective remarks are inappropriate and should be avoided.

Confidential Comments to Editors

Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the editorial team when necessary, particularly regarding ethical concerns or suitability for publication.

Recommendation Categories

Reviewers should select one of the following recommendations:

1. Accept

2. Minor revision

3. Major revision

4. Reject

Each recommendation should be supported by clear reasoning.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts and related materials are confidential. Reviewers must not share content or use unpublished information for personal or academic purposes.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

If reviewers use any automated tools to assist in evaluation, such use must be limited to language or structural assessment and should not compromise confidentiality or intellectual property.

After Submitting the Review

Once the review is completed, reviewers should not retain copies of the manuscript or related files and should refrain from discussing the submission with others.

Professional Conduct

Reviewers are expected to adhere to high standards of professionalism, integrity, and respect throughout the review process