Reviewer Guidelines.

1. Role of reviewers

Reviewers provide independent, constructive and confidential evaluation of submitted manuscripts to help editors reach informed decisions and to improve the quality of published research.

2. Confidentiality

All materials associated with the review process are confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss or use manuscripts or reviewer reports beyond the review process without explicit editorial consent.

3. Conflicts of interest

Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts with which they have a personal, professional or financial conflict of interest.

4. Evaluation criteria

• Originality and significance of contribution.
• Soundness of methodology and reproducibility.
• Rigour of data analysis and interpretation.
• Clarity, structure and quality of writing.
• Adequacy and currency of references.
• Adherence to publication ethics.

5. Reviewer report

Reports should include a summary of the manuscript, a recommendation (accept, minor revisions, major revisions, reject), and specific comments organised into major and minor points. Comments should be professional, respectful and actionable.

6. Timelines

Reviewers are requested to complete reviews within three weeks of accepting an assignment. Delays should be communicated promptly to the Editorial Office.

7. Post-acceptance

Reviewers may be invited to review revised manuscripts. Editorial acknowledgements will be published where reviewers consent.

8. Concerns

Any concerns regarding ethics, potential misconduct or dual submission must be raised immediately with the Editor-in-Chief.