Duties of Reviewers

Contribution of Peer Review

Peer review assists the Chief Editor and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Unqualified to Review or Promptness

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the Editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the Chief Editor. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Chief Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Conflict of Interest Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors.