Reviewer Guideline

Support and Contribution to Editorial Decisions: The referee is obliged to take into account the “Referee Evaluation Criteria” in the evaluation process from the moment he/she is assigned through the system and accepts the task. They assist the editors in editorial decisions and help authors to improve their articles through editorial communication. Point out the completion of other articles, works, sources, references, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article.

Timeliness: Any reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal, or who knows that the review of the manuscript cannot take place on time, should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, so that a new reviewer can be appointed.

Confidentiality: Reviewed manuscripts must be kept confidential before publication. A reviewer should not share the information contained in a study that he/she has been assigned to review with others before publication. This also applies to reviewers who decline the review invitation. The names of the reviewers are not disclosed/published.

Impartiality: Reviewers should be objective in their decision to publish the research they review. Comments on the manuscript proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.

References: Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. The reviewer should also identify any other references.