For Reviewers

Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors on Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest:

Conflicts of interest can potentially influence the objectivity, integrity, or perceived value of published research. Therefore, IJCMAS places great importance on the full disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest and adheres to the guidelines set forth by COPE in handling such cases.

1. Definition of Conflicts of Interest:
   • A conflict of interest can be any situation that has the potential to bias the design, implementation, or interpretation of research. This includes, but is not limited to, financial interests (grants, employment, investments, patents, copyrights), personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.
2. Author Responsibility:
   • Authors are required to disclose all potential conflicts of interest during the submission process. This includes financial, personal, or other relationships that could influence (or could be perceived to influence) their work.
3. Reviewer and Editor Responsibility:
   • Reviewers and editors must also disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript and recuse themselves from the review process if a conflict exists.
4. Handling Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest:
   • If an undisclosed conflict of interest comes to light after publication, IJCMAS will take action following COPE guidelines. The published article may be corrected or retracted, and an announcement explaining the situation will be published.
   • If the conflict of interest is identified before publication, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for revision, or the review process may be halted until the issue is resolved.

IJCMAS is committed to a fair and unbiased publication process, free from influence by conflicts of interest. By requiring full disclosure, we aim to maintain the integrity of our publication record and uphold the trust of our readers and the scientific community.

Ethical Guidelines for Being a Reviewer as per COPE:

Peer review is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing and is vital for maintaining the quality and integrity of published research. As a reviewer for IJCMAS, you have significant responsibilities, and your contributions are greatly appreciated. The following guidelines are based on COPE's best practice guidelines for reviewers:

1. Promptness: If you have been invited to review a manuscript but you cannot complete the review in the proposed timeframe, please inform the editorial office as soon as possible so alternative reviewers can be considered.
2. Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shown to or discussed with others without authorization from the editor.
3. Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.
4. Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective review.
5. Anonymity: Unless the journal uses open peer review, reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not reveal their identities to the authors, either directly or indirectly.
6. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
7. Completeness and Timeliness: You should complete your review within the agreed-upon timeframe. Please provide a comprehensive, evidenced-based, and constructive critique of the submitted manuscript.
8. Report Suspected Ethical Problems: If you suspect any ethical issues with the manuscript (e.g., data fabrication, plagiarism), you should report this to the editor with as much detail and evidence as possible.

By agreeing to review for IJCMAS, you commit to adhere to these guidelines, which are designed to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, and quality of our peer-review process. Your contribution is crucial to the quality of the research that IJCMAS publishes and we thank you for your time and expertise.

Guidelines for Reviewers on Conducting a Review as per COPE:

Conducting a peer review requires critical evaluation of a manuscript’s content while adhering to ethical standards and maintaining objectivity. As a reviewer for IJCMAS, we request you to follow the subsequent guidelines, based on COPE's best practice guidelines:

1. Assess the Manuscript: Read the manuscript thoroughly and assess its quality. Check if the study is well-designed and the results are clearly presented. Evaluate the novelty, relevance, and impact of the study in the field of microbiology and applied sciences.
2. Check for Adequate Referencing: Ensure that the authors have appropriately cited previous related work. Inform the editor if you notice any significant omission of other work in the field.
3. Evaluate the Methodology: Check whether the methods are adequately detailed to allow replication of the work. Comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study.
4. Examine the Data: Ensure the data supports the conclusions. Check for any flaws in the study’s data or its interpretation.
5. Objectivity: Reviews should be unbiased and objective. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Views should be expressed clearly with supporting arguments.
6. Provide Constructive Feedback: Provide clear, constructive, and actionable feedback that will help the authors improve their manuscript. Highlight the strengths as well as weaknesses of the manuscript.
7. Maintain Confidentiality: Reviewers should maintain confidentiality about the manuscript and the review process. They should not disclose or use the information in the reviewed paper for their advantage.
8. Report Ethical Concerns: Any suspicion of ethical misconduct such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission should be reported to the editor, with the provision of any necessary evidence.
9. Recommendation: Provide a recommendation to the editor about the suitability of the manuscript for publication in IJCMAS.

By conducting the review in accordance with these guidelines, you help to ensure the integrity and quality of published research in IJCMAS. We appreciate your contribution to upholding these standards and thank you for your time and expertise.

Guidelines for Reviewers on Preparing a Report as per COPE:

The review report provides valuable input to the editorial decision-making process and can greatly assist authors in improving their manuscript. As a reviewer for IJCMAS, please adhere to the following guidelines when preparing your review report, based on COPE's best practice guidelines:

1. Structure your Report: Start with a brief summary of the manuscript, describing its main contributions and overall strengths and weaknesses. Then provide a detailed critique of different manuscript sections: introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion.
2. Provide Constructive Criticism: When pointing out shortcomings or errors, always explain your reasoning and, if possible, suggest how the authors can address the issue. Avoid personal comments or criticism.
3. Evaluate the Manuscript as a Whole: Consider the originality and significance of the research, the quality of the data and its presentation, the soundness of the methodology and analysis, the referencing of previous work, and the clarity and style of writing.
4. Confidential Comments to the Editor: Use this section for comments about potential ethical issues, suspicions of plagiarism, redundant or duplicate publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or any other issues that should not be shared with the authors.
5. Final Recommendation: Clearly state your recommendation to the editor regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication. If you believe that the manuscript can be improved, indicate whether you would be willing to review a revised version.
6. Ethical Considerations: Maintain confidentiality and do not share, discuss, or use the content of the manuscript or your review for personal advantage.

By following these guidelines, you ensure your report's effectiveness in assisting both the authors in improving their work and the editor in making the publication decision. Your time, expertise, and commitment to maintaining high-quality, ethical scholarly communication are greatly appreciated.

Guidelines for Reviewers on What to Consider After Peer Review:

The peer review process doesn't end once you've submitted your report. Following the review, there are a number of points to consider in order to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the process. Below are the COPE guidelines regarding this:

1. Maintaining Confidentiality: As a reviewer, you should continue to respect the confidentiality of the review process and not reveal any details of the manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
2. Avoid Contact with Authors: Direct contact with authors is inappropriate before or after the review process. All communication should go through the relevant editor or the journal's editorial office.
3. Citing the Manuscript: The reviewed manuscript should not be used or cited in your work until it has been published and the public citation details are available.
4. Avoid Using Knowledge Gained from the Review: Information obtained through the peer review process should not be used for your own research or in discussions with colleagues, unless you have the explicit permission of the authors.
5. Responding to Further Queries: There may be instances when you're asked to comment on revisions to the manuscript or to provide additional advice on the manuscript, especially if new reviewers are brought into the process. Please respond to these requests promptly and courteously.

By adhering to these guidelines, you uphold the integrity and confidentiality of the peer-review process, which is of paramount importance to the quality and reputation of the IJCMAS. Your diligence, professionalism, and dedication to the standards of peer review are greatly appreciated.

Guidelines for Reviewers on Peer Review Training and Mentoring:

Peer review is a skill that is developed with experience and training. IJCMAS acknowledges the importance of peer review training and mentoring for reviewers to ensure the integrity and quality of the review process. The following guidelines, based on COPE's best practices, have been developed:

1. Training Opportunities: Reviewers should seek training opportunities to enhance their reviewing skills. This could be through workshops, online courses, or guidance documents provided by scholarly societies or publishers.
2. Mentoring: New reviewers are encouraged to seek mentoring from experienced reviewers. A mentor can provide advice on conducting the review, writing the report, and navigating ethical issues.
3. Practice: Reviewers can develop their skills by starting with reviewing preprints, participating in peer review mentoring programs, or co-reviewing with a more experienced reviewer.
4. Feedback: Reviewers should seek and be receptive to feedback on their reviews. This can be from editors or from authors.
5. Stay Updated: Reviewers should stay updated on the latest developments in peer review and ethical guidelines, such as those provided by COPE.
6. Reviewer Recognition: IJCMAS will acknowledge the contributions of reviewers and will explore options for reviewer recognition.

By improving your skills as a reviewer, you can make significant contributions to the scientific community and maintain the quality and integrity of the research published in IJCMAS. We appreciate your time and expertise and are committed to supporting you in your role as a reviewer.

Peer Reviewer Selection Policy:

At the International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS), we recognize the crucial role that peer reviewers play in ensuring the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. To maintain a rigorous and fair peer review process, we have developed the following Peer Reviewer Selection Policy in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines:

1. Expertise and Qualifications:
   • Peer reviewers for IJCMAS are selected based on their expertise, qualifications, and experience in the specific subject area relevant to the manuscript under review.
   • Reviewers should have a strong publication record and possess in-depth knowledge of the research field, methodologies, and ethical considerations.
2. Unbiased and Independent Selection:
   • Reviewers are selected impartially and independently, free from any conflicts of interest or personal biases that may compromise the integrity of the review process.
   • Editors and the editorial board take into consideration any conflicts of interest disclosed by potential reviewers and ensure that reviewers with competing interests are excluded from the review process.
3. Maintaining Confidentiality:
   • IJCMAS ensures the confidentiality of the peer review process. Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the manuscripts they review and refrain from disclosing or discussing the content with any unauthorized individuals.
4. Diverse and Inclusive Selection:
   • IJCMAS promotes diversity and inclusivity in reviewer selection, considering factors such as gender, geographic location, institutional affiliation, and underrepresented groups to foster a broader representation in the peer review process.
   • We strive to avoid any biases or discrimination in the selection of reviewers and welcome reviewers from diverse backgrounds and perspectives.
5. Regular Evaluation and Feedback:
   • The performance and quality of peer reviewers are regularly assessed by the Editor-in-Chief and editorial board.
   • Reviewers are provided with constructive feedback on their reviews to help them enhance their skills and maintain the highest standards of the peer review process.
6. Continued Professional Development:
   • IJCMAS encourages reviewers to engage in continuous professional development activities, such as attending workshops, webinars, or conferences related to peer review, research ethics, and publication practices.
7. Reviewer Recognition:
   • IJCMAS acknowledges the invaluable contributions of peer reviewers by providing them with due recognition for their efforts. This may include acknowledgement in published articles, certificates of appreciation, or inclusion in the reviewer database.

By adhering to this Peer Reviewer Selection Policy, IJCMAS aims to maintain a robust and objective peer review process that upholds the highest standards of scholarly publishing.