Reviewer Policies

For Reviewers

Our journal values the work done by peer reviewers in the academic community. Reviewing contributes to publication excellence and advances research in your field.

Peer review is essential for developing research across all disciplines. Reviewers help authors improve their manuscripts and broaden their knowledge, while gaining early access to cutting-edge research. By participating, reviewers contribute directly to the advancement of their field.

Reviewers Guidelines

Manuscripts submitted for publication in our journal are peer-reviewed single-blind, except for a limited number of journals where double-blind peer review is required. Single-blind review maintains the anonymity of reviewers, ensuring objective and unbiased evaluation. Reviewers are advised to consult COPE Ethical Guidelines to provide high-quality, impartial reviews.

When conducting a review, reviewers should consider the following:

1. Original Results Reporting

• Ensure results are original, authentic, and free of plagiarism.
• Manuscripts should not have been published previously, except for studies reporting reproduced results (e.g., new clinical trials).

2. Experimenting and Analyzing

• Experiments and analyses must follow recognized technical standards and be systematically described.
• Details of experiments and reagents should be provided to allow accurate conclusions.

3. Results Interpretation

• Authors should explain results comprehensively.
• Manuscripts with incomplete interpretations may be rejected.

4. Composition and Language

• Manuscripts must be clearly written in English, using correct grammar and style.
• Sequential numbering facilitates reviewing and editing.
• Authors should seek professional assistance to ensure manuscripts are free of grammatical, scientific, and typographical errors.

5. Research Involving Humans and Animals

• All research must meet the highest international ethical standards.

6. Guidelines and Community Standards for Data Reporting

• Manuscripts should follow appropriate reporting guidelines and public data deposition requirements (e.g., DNA sequences, microarray expression data, structural studies).

In order to ensure data availability, manuscripts should follow appropriate reporting guidelines. JNL pursues disseminating research, thus requiring public deposition of data as per the guidelines followed (for example, DNA sequences, microarray expression data, and structural studies). The following standards should also be followed if they are similar.

Important Points to Consider

Reviewers’ reports should address:

• Does the manuscript make sense, and how can it be improved?
• Are the authors’ declarations adequately supported?
• Are previous findings treated fairly?
• Are methodology details sufficient for reproducibility?
• Does any method warrant detailed supporting protocols online?

Reviewers Policy

• By accepting an invitation to review, reviewers commit to ethical guidelines (including COPE).
• Reviews may be reused for publishing services (e.g., resubmissions) while adhering to COPE and journal policies.
• Confidentiality must be maintained during and after peer review.

Privacy Statement

• All peer review material must remain confidential until publication.
• Reviewers should consult the Editor-in-Chief before seeking additional assistance.

The Peer Review Process

• Our journal operates a double-blind peer review system.
• Authors’ names and affiliations are hidden from reviewers; reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors.
• Each manuscript is reviewed by selected experts (usually two), assessing originality, accuracy, and completeness.

Points to Note for Reviewers:

• Evaluate the entire manuscript carefully.
• Provide comments and suggestions, but do not edit content.
• Do not contact authors directly; use the Editor-in-Chief for any ethical concerns.
• Decisions should be based solely on content quality, not author characteristics.

Ensuring Anonymity for Double-Blind Review

• Provide a separate title page with author names and affiliations. Upload it during the “Title Page” stage.
• Manuscript content and supplementary files must not contain author identifiers.
• Do not include names in acknowledgments until after review.
• Avoid phrases like “we have previously shown [reference].”
• Do not cite unpublished works of the authors.
• Rebuttals and appeals should not include author identities.

Join as a Reviewer

We welcome experts to join our reviewer community, contributing to the integrity and advancement of research in all fields.