Peer Review Policy:

1. The articles submitted for publication shall be a blind peer reviewed.

2. The Peer reviewers shall be provided with the format for submitting their comments on the articles that will be reviewed by them.

Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere:

Peer reviewers should:
• only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to
carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
• respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its
review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the
journal
• not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other
person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
• declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure
whether something constitutes a relevant interest
• not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality,
religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial
considerations
• be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory
and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments
• acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out
their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
• provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true
representation of their expertise
• recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered
serious misconduct
( Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)

 

                                                                 REFEREE REPORT FORM

               Kindly provide your comments for each of the criteria outlined below with reference to whether you find merits in the article, have suggestions for revisions or have reasons to disapprove.

  1. Relevance to the Contemporary Society:
  1. Contribution to Knowledge:
  1. Clarity and Logic in Analysis:
  1. Language:
  1. Methodology of Research Articles:
  1. Implications for Intervention:
  1. Appropriateness of References:
  1. Originality:

Over all Referee Report:

Please indicate ‘Yes’ for any one of the following:

  1. Recommended for publication with only language editing: Yes / No
  2. Recommended for publication with a condition of incorporating the suggestions made in this report: Yes / No
  3. Not recommended for publication because of reasons mentioned in the attached sheet.

 

 

Date:                                                                                                              Name and Signature of the Referee