International Clinical Neuroscience Journal

Reviewers’ Guidelines

Introduction

The review process is an important aspect of the publication process of an article. It helps an editor in making decision on an article and also enables the author to improve the manuscript.

The International Clinical Neuroscience Journal operates a single blind peer review system.

 

Before accepting to review a manuscript, reviewers should ensure that:

  •  The manuscript is within their area of expertise.
  •  They can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.

 

Conflict of Interest

“Conflict of interest (COI) exists when an individual or institution has two or more obligations or interests that may compete with each other.”. WAME

“Reviewers should declare their relationships and activities that might influence or bias their evaluation of a manuscript and reject the review request if a conflict exists”. ICMJE

 

Confidentiality

Manuscripts are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. Reviewers should ensure that the review process is confidential. Peer reviewers have an obligation to preserve confidentiality of  manuscript during and after the review process.

“Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and refrain from using information obtained during the peer review process for your own or another’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others”. COPE

 

Fairness

Reviews should be truthful and objective and keep unbiased by considerations related to :

  •  The origin of the manuscript
  •  Religious, political or cultural viewpoint of the author
  •  Gender, race, ethnicity or citizenry of the author

 

Review reports

In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on the following:

  •  Originality
  •  Contribution to the field
  •  Technical quality
  •  Clarity of presentation
  •  Depth of research

 

Reviewers should also monitor and notice that the author(s) have followed the instruction for authors, editorial policies and publication ethics.

The report should be precise, objective, beneficialand clear. Comments should be supported by facts and constructive arguments regarding to the content of the manuscript.

Reviewers should not rewrite the manuscript; however necessary corrections and suggestions for improvements should be made.

 

Timeliness

Reviewers should only accept a manuscript when they are confident that they can complete their reports in due time. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner.

 

Recommendations

Reviewers’ recommendation should be either:

  • Accept
  • Revisions Required
  • Resubmit Elsewhere
  • Reject

Recommendation should be backed with constructive comments based on the content of the manuscript.

 

Resources

  •