Reviewer Guidelines

Instructions for Accessing the Article to Be Reviewed

  1. Log in to the journal’s website using your username and password.
  2. On the screen that appears, reviewers will find the tab My Queue, where you can click on the title of the article assigned for review.
  3. After clicking on the submission, the first step is to accept or decline the review request. Information about the article and the deadline for submitting your review will be displayed.
  4. You may also view the submission metadata by selecting View All Submission Details.
  5. On the left side tab (step 2), on the GUIDELINES section, you will see the outlines of the mandatory steps for the evaluation.
  6. In step 3 (Download & Review), the reviewer may download the article file, consult the guidelines, and fill in the form fields as initially requested.
  7. Under the Upload section, in Reviewer Files, the reviewer may upload a revised version of the manuscript.
  8. The Review Discussions field is where communication between reviewer, author, and editor takes place.
  9. In the Recommendation field, the appropriate recommendation must be selected and the review submitted to complete the process.
  10. After completing this stage, simply click Submit Review to proceed to the final step.
  11. Under the Completion tab, a thank-you message will be displayed, along with the Review Discussions field, which allows for any follow-up questions or discussion between the reviewer and the author.

Conflict of Interest Policy

Conflicts of interest may be of a personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial nature. They can arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that may influence the preparation or evaluation of manuscripts.

In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

Editors: must not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the explicit written consent of the author. Editors must refrain from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (potentially) institutions associated with the manuscript.

Reviewers: must treat privileged information as confidential. Ideas obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should decline to evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved.

Authors: must disclose in the manuscript any financial or other types of conflicts that could influence the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support for the project must be clearly stated.

Consequences of Failing to Disclose a Conflict of Interest

Any potential conflict of interest will be addressed based on the flowcharts provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available for download at http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts.

Does a Conflict of Interest Disqualify a Manuscript from Publication?
 If any type of conflict of interest (as described above) is identified—prior to, during, or after the peer review process—the manuscript will be placed on hold until the situation is clarified and resolved.