Innovation, Research, and Progress: Read Our Leading Journals Now!

Connect with Peers and Establish Your Academic Presence: Use Our Profile ID!

The Ultimate Author Services Hub: Unlock Your Writing Potential!

Where Ideas Meet Action: Attend Our Innovative Conferences!
STM Conferences

The Key to Your Success: Our Dynamic and Engaging Training Programs!
Training Programs

The Ultimate Platform for Aspiring Authors: Submit Your Manuscript Today!
Manuscript engine

For Reviewers

Who are Reviewers?

The role of a reviewer in academic journals is to evaluate the quality and validity of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers are typically experts in the field relevant to the manuscript, and their job is to assess whether the research is sound, original, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

The reviewer's primary responsibility is to provide feedback to the editor and the authors. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses and suggest improvements or changes that could enhance its quality. They must also ensure that the research is ethical and adheres to the journal's policies and standards.

Become a Reviewer
  • Register on APID:Go to the APID website and create an account by providing your personal and contact details.
  • Complete the reviewer application form: Fill out the application form to Join as a reviewer. If you already have an account, ensure that the "area of expertise" section on your profile accurately reflects your field of knowledge.
  • Submit to relevant repositories: Submit the article to relevant repositories. This will make the article more accessible to readers and increase its visibility.
  • Participate in conferences: Presenting the article at conferences is a great way to gain exposure and engage with other researchers in the field however this can only be done if article is published in Open Access Publishing Format. Consider submitting an abstract or proposal to relevant conferences.
  • Collaborate with the media: Reach out to journalists or media outlets that cover topics related to the article. This can help to increase the article's visibility and impact outside of academic circles.
  • Engage with readers: Respond to comments and questions from readers on the article's publication platform or social media. This can help to build relationships with other researchers and potentially lead to future collaborations.
Guidelines for Conducting Reviews
  • Pre-Review Considerations

  • Manage Reviews

  • Organizing Your Review

  • Post-Review Considerations

Before beginning the review process, there are several important points to consider:

  • Expertise: Ensure that you have the appropriate level of expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. If you are not an expert in the area, consider declining the invitation to review or recommending a colleague who is more qualified.
  • Conflict of Interest:Check for any potential conflicts of interest, such as having collaborated with the authors or having a personal relationship with them. If you have any conflicts of interest, disclose them to the editor immediately.
  • Time: Consider whether you have the time to complete a thorough review within the given timeframe. If you cannot meet the deadline, notify the editor as soon as possible.
  • Ethical Considerations:Make sure you understand the ethical considerations involved in the review process, such as confidentiality and data sharing.
  • Guidelines: Familiarize yourself with the reviewer guidelines provided by the journal, including the evaluation criteria, feedback format, and submission requirements.
  • Record Keeping:Keep a record of the manuscript you are reviewing, including the submission date, the manuscript title, and the journal name. This will help you avoid reviewing the same manuscript multiple times.
  • Communication: If you have any questions or concerns about the review process or the manuscript, communicate them clearly and professionally to the editor.

By considering these points before beginning the review process, you can ensure that you are well-prepared to provide a thorough, objective, and constructive review that meets the standards of the journal.

Eligibility, Responsibilities & Eligibility

Reviewers evaluate journal article submissions based on the journal's requirements, predefined criteria, and the quality, completeness, and accuracy of the research presented. They provide feedback on the paper, make suggestions for improvements, and advise the editor on whether to accept, reject, or request changes to the article. The final decision is always made by the editor, but reviewers play an important role in determining the outcome.


Reviewers should meet the following criteria:

  • Hold a Ph.D. (or MD for medical fields), preferably with post-doctoral experience,

  • Be an active researcher,

  • Possess official and recognized affiliation (University or Research Institute) relevant experience and have a proven publication record in the field of the submitted paper,

  • Not hold any conflicts of interest with the authors, including if they have published together in the last five years.

  • Reviewers who accept to review a manuscript are expected to:

  • Have the necessary expertise to judge the scientific quality of the manuscript,

  • Provide quality review reports and remain responsive throughout the peer review process

  • Maintain standards of professionalism and ethics.


  • Review 2-3 manuscripts a year.
  • Return the review results within 2-3 weeks.
  • Provide complete and detailed comments on submitted papers.
  • Serve a two-year term and may be re-appointed for another term.


  • Contribute to the Academic Community: Reviewing allows you to contribute to the academic community and share your knowledge and expertise.
  • Improve the Quality of Research: Through your review, you can help improve the quality of research by identifying errors, inconsistencies, or areas that require further clarification.
  • Help Shape the Field: By providing feedback on manuscripts, you can help shape the field by identifying emerging trends, areas of significance, or gaps in knowledge.
  • Expand Your Own Knowledge: Reviewing manuscripts can also be a way to expand your own knowledge and stay up-to-date with the latest research in your field.
  • Build Your Reputation: Being an active reviewer can also help build your reputation as an expert in your field and increase your visibility within the academic community.
Peer-Review Process

The peer review process involves the evaluation of scholarly work by experts in the same field or related fields to ensure that it meets the standards of quality and accuracy before it is published. It typically includes the submission of a manuscript to a journal, an initial screening by the editor, and a detailed evaluation by at least two independent reviewers. The reviewers provide feedback on the manuscript, which the editor uses to make a decision on whether to accept or reject it. The peer review process helps ensure the highest standards of quality and accuracy in published research.

Review reports
  • Review reports are detailed evaluations of scholarly works conducted by experts in the same field or related fields.
  • They provide feedback on the quality and accuracy of the work, identify any errors or inconsistencies, and suggest improvements to the manuscript.
  • Review reports typically include a summary of the manuscript, an assessment of its strengths and weaknesses, and a detailed evaluation of the methodology, data analysis, and conclusions.
  • Reviewers may also provide additional feedback on the clarity of the writing, the organization of the manuscript, and other aspects of the work.
  • The review reports are typically submitted to the journal editor, who uses them to make a decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript.
  • In some cases, the author may be asked to revise and resubmit the manuscript based on the feedback provided in the review reports.
  • Review reports are an essential component of the peer review process, helping to ensure that published research meets the highest standards of quality and accuracy.
Situations When Reviewers Should Decline to Review a Submission
  • When they have a conflict of interest, such as a personal or financial relationship with the authors, funding agencies, or institutions involved in the research.
  • When they lack the necessary expertise or knowledge to evaluate the manuscript.
  • When they do not have enough time to complete the review within the given deadline.
  • When they have previously reviewed the same manuscript for another journal or publication.
  • When they have a bias or prejudice that could compromise the fairness of the review process.
  • When they have a personal or professional relationship with the editor that could influence the review process.
  • When they are unable to maintain confidentiality or privacy, such as if they have shared the manuscript with others or have a conflict of interest that could compromise confidentiality.

Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest in the "Confidential" section of the review form, which will be taken into account by the editor. Reviewers should also disclose whether they have had any prior discussions about the manuscript with the authors.

Conflicts of interest
  • Conflict of interest (COI) can arise when a reviewer has a personal or financial relationship with the authors, funding agencies, or institutions involved in the research.
  • COI can also occur if the reviewer has a competing interest, such as a personal or professional agenda that could influence their evaluation of the manuscript.
  • To avoid COI, reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the editor before accepting a review assignment.
  • If a reviewer becomes aware of a potential COI during the review process, they should inform the editor immediately and withdraw from the review.
  • COI can undermine the integrity of the peer review process and compromise the quality and fairness of the evaluation of the manuscript.
Maintaining Confidentiality during the Peer Review Process

During the single- or double-blind peer review process, manuscripts are expected to be strictly confidential. Reviewers are not allowed to disclose the manuscript's content, including the Abstract, or discuss its content with anyone outside the peer review process.

In addition, reviewers should be cautious not to reveal their identity to the authors, either in their comments or in the metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format. However, if needed, reviewers may consult with colleagues from their research group, provided that they maintain the manuscript's confidentiality. To do so, reviewers should first contact [email protected] or the Academic Editor handling the manuscript and note the name(s) of their colleague(s) in the "Comments to the editor" section of their report.

Further Correspondence

To receive further assistance on joining as a reviewer, please contact us via email at [email protected] or submit your query through our online portal.