Reviewers guidelines

Here are some indispensable questions a reviewer has to make to him/herself once he/she gets and accepts a new original manuscript:

1. Does the paper address relevant scientific questions within the scope of the journal?

2. Does the paper present original concepts, ideas, tools, or data?

3. Are substantial conclusions reached?

4. Are the scientific methods and assumptions valid and clearly outlined?

5. Are the results sufficient to support the interpretations and conclusions?

6. Is the description of experiments and calculations sufficiently complete and precise to allow their reproduction by fellow scientists (traceability of results)?

7. Do the authors give proper credit to related work and clearly indicate their own new/original contribution?

8. Does the title clearly reflect the contents of the paper?

9. Does the abstract provide a concise and complete summary?

10. Is the overall presentation well structured and clear?

11. Is the language fluent and precise?

12. Are mathematical formulae, symbols, abbreviations, and units correctly defined and used?

13. Should any parts of the paper (text, formulae, figures, tables) be clarified, reduced, combined, or eliminated?

14. Are the number and quality of references appropriate?

15. Is the amount and quality of supplementary material appropriate?