- Reviewers should follow the review guidelines and decide on the articles with special reference to originality and novelty,.
- Reviewers should understand that the peer review process is confidential and the information should not be used for personal advantage.
- Reviewers should clearly understand that the review process should be unbiased and that the authors deserve full credit for their work. There shall be no personal criticism of the author.
- Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
- Reviewers should submit a comprehensive and substantial peer review report promptly. If there is any delay, it should be communicated to the editor.
- Reviewers should also bring to the editorial committee's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the article under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
- Reviewers should have a look at the assigned manuscript and decide whether the paper fits within the stated scope of the journal or not. They should evaluate the manuscript within the provided timeline to facilitate the timely completion of the review process.
- Confidential remarks to be done, and the reviewer can advise the editor for acceptance, rejection, or modification. Their comments and reviews must never be influenced by race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, language, origin, gender, or any political agency.