Reviewer Guidelines

Review Editors

The primary role of review editors is to act as reviewers in the peer-review of submitted manuscripts. Along with associate editors, review editors are the key persons of the Chetana review process, since they are responsible for certifying the validity and accuracy of publications, and for helping authors to improve the quality of their manuscripts as well as the way in which the research is communicated.

Responsibilities

The mandate for reviewers is to ensure that experiments and studies were conducted correctly, taking into account appropriate ethical considerations, and that the conclusions are based on a valid, logical interpretation of the results.

Reviewers are obliged to:

  • Keep all manuscript files and review reports confidential. These should only be shared with the authors and the handling editor of the manuscript in the review forum.
    • Posting of the review report publicly is prohibited.
  • Refrain from disclosing their identity to the authors and other reviewer(s) until after completing the review process.
  • Refrain from using inappropriate language and unconstructive behaviour. This will not be tolerated and may result in a reviewer being revoked from the assignment and, in more serious cases, from the editorial board.
  • Ensure a timely review by completing their assignment as soon as possible and by notifying the handling editor and Editorial Office of any expected delays immediately. Please see additional guidelines for reviewers issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics, that detail further ethical obligations of reviewers, here.

Initial Validation

To support you in ensuring the quality of the manuscripts, all submissions, including submissions to your Research Topic undergo standard initial quality checks by the Research Integrity team. All submissions are pre-screened for:

  • Textual overlap with and similarity to published material
  • Potential image or data manipulation
  • Language quality
  • Adherence to editorial policies
  • Adherence to ethical standards
  • Potential conflicts of interest

If issues are identified in manuscripts you are handling, the Research Integrity team will notify you and the authors as part of our standard procedure. No action is required from you unless specifically requested.

Once you have completed the report, you will be able to provide a recommendation to the editor:

  • Minor revisions - Manuscript can be accepted
  • Revision is required
  • Substantial revision is required

Making a Recommendation

When you are ready to make your final decision, please consider the following points:

  • Has the final manuscript been submitted?
  • Does the manuscript propose a suitable research question and hypothesis, supported by relevant theory?
  • Do the authors apply a correct and transparent methodology?
  • Is the study design and materials clearly laid out?
  • Is the language and presentation clear and adequate?
  • Are figures and tables in line with scientific norms and standards?
  • Do the authors follow Chetana author guidelines on editorial and ethical policies?
  • Is the manuscript grounded in existing literature through sufficient referencing and does it offer an appropriate coverage of the relevant literature?

Endorsing for publication

Should you endorse the manuscript for publication, you confirm that your comments have been adequately addressed by the authors. If manuscript is not yet in a publishable form, please do not endorse the manuscript.
You will be able to provide the authors with any final comments you may have. Please note that your final comments should not contain any issues that have yet to be addressed by the authors. When finalizing your review, you will also be asked to confirm that you agree to your name and affiliation being disclosed on the article, if published.
The handling editor will be notified of your endorsement and is able to accept the manuscript at the end of the process, if appropriate.

Withdrawing and/or recommending rejection

Should you recommend rejection of a manuscript, you will remain anonymous, and your recommendation will be sent to the handling editor, who will be able to forward this recommendation to the Specialty Chief Editor. Should the handling editor choose to continue review following your withdrawal and/or recommendation other reviewers may be assigned, and your report remain available in the forum.
When withdrawing/recommending rejection, you will be asked to select the reason for your decision from a list (see screenshots below). While this is not mandatory, you are also encouraged to provide the handling editor with further comments. The reasons given will be visible to the associate editor, chief editors, and Editorial Office, but will not be available to the authors.

Final Decision and Validation

Once all reviewers completed their activity, the handling editor will be asked to make their final decision. Accepted manuscripts undergo a final quality check by the Editorial Office. Once approved, the abstract will be published online immediately, and the full manuscript will move on to typesetting.
You will be informed once the handling editor has made their final decision.