Guidelines for reviewer

Reviewers have a responsibility in evaluating scientific articles after reading by providing suggestions and constructive feedback to the authors of the articles. Reviewers deliver the strengths and weaknesses of an article and provide input to improve the quality of the article.

Before reviewing, please note the following:

  1. Is your expertise appropriate to the article requested to be reviewed ? If the manuscript received is not related to your area of expertise, please immediately communicate it to the editor.
  2. If you agree to review the article, please notice that the review process must be completed maximum in four weeks. Notify the editor if you require a longer period.

In reviewing process of the article, please consider the following:

  1. Title: is it clearly illustrating the article?
  2. Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article?
  3. Introduction: Has the author described the contents of the article accurately and explained the problems presented clearly? The introduction should contain a summary of relevant previous research and solutions to the problems raised, including the brief methods and hypotheses explaination.
  4. Method: Does the article provide a comprehensive and complete explanation of the following:
  • the description how the data is collected
  • the appropriate reference used for this study
  • the suitable of exposure design for answering to the question
  • a decent enough information to imitate the research
  • a detail explanation of any new methods
  • adequately explanation of the tools and materials have been used
  • the description of recorded data type, right in describing the measurement
  1. Results: Are there any explanation in the research findings, data analysis and statistical tools? 
  2. Discussion: Does the article explain the comparison of the results to previous studies? Are the results contradictory to previous theories? 
  3. Conclusion: does the writer explain how better scientific research to be followed-up?.