Reviewers are leading scientists volunteer their time and subject expertise to help the editors to take final decision on manuscript submitted to our journals. Reviewers should notify the editor immediately if unable they are not available to review the review due the non-availability of time or difference in the subject expertise. In such situation reviewers may suggest a suitable alternate reviewer and their contact details.

Reviewers should communicate to editors if they have any potential conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript and decline to review to such in such situation stating the reason to editor. Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of the review process. Reviewers should not contact authors or share/discuss the information presented in the manuscript under review with others.

Reviewers are expected to submit their review report in stipulated time by the editor. Reviewers are expected to comply with journal’s scope, content, and quality of the peer review and provide impartial, constructive, informative and timely review reports on the manuscript under review considering scientific accuracy and originality. Reviewers may give any one of the recommendation as Accept without changes/Major revision required/Accept with minor revision/Reject.

Reviewers should also check the ethical issues relevant to the subject content presented in the manuscript such as use of humans or animal or genetically modified organism by authors in their research and significant similarity between the manuscript under review and any published paper. Reviewers should report such issues to editors (which are not disclosed to authors as such).