- To send the report by the time given for review
- Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research paper/ research article reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should compulsorily notify the chief editor in time.
- Standards of objectivity
- Reviewers are requested to send their report in the prescribed format, which will be sent along with the manuscripts for review. No personal criticism of the author/authors is reported if the research paper/ research article found inappropriate. Reviewers are requested to express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- To maintain secrecy
- Any manuscript received for review must be treated as most confidential document. These must not be shown to or discussed with any other except as authorized by the chief editor. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for any personal advantage.
- Conflict of interest and Disclosure of Unpublished Material
- Reviewers are requested not to consider the manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from collaborative, competitive or connections with any of the authors, or institutions relevant to the papers/articles. The Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be utilized in anywhere.
- To help in editorial decisions
- Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Peer review helps to the editorial board in making their editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
