Journal of Women's Reproductive Health

As a reviewer for a journal, it is the reviewer's responsibility to ensure that the guidelines for selecting and accepting papers are followed. While seasoned researchers and academics may already be familiar with these guidelines, they can be especially helpful for those new to the role of a reviewer.
 

Few important guidelines:

Please feel free to provide an unbiased evaluation without any hesitation. We are willing to make any necessary revisions to ensure the desired level of quality. If a manuscript is not within the scope of the journal, kindly decline it without review.
 

If you have rejected the article, provide a clear reason and offer guidance on any necessary next steps. For instance, if you are rejected due to language or subject matter, kindly suggest editing or indicate that the topic is not within the scope. It's crucial to maintain a high standard of language quality that is understandable to readers worldwide.
 

Ethical Obligations:

• Reviewer must evaluate all manuscripts submitted for publication impartially, based solely on their individual merits, without taking into account the author(s)' race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation.
• The Reviewer has the sole responsibility of promptly and thoroughly reviewing all manuscripts submitted for publication and deciding whether to accept or reject them. If a manuscript is deemed unsuitable for the journal, it may be declined without review.
• To ensure confidentiality, the Reviewer must not share any details about a manuscript under review with anyone except those providing professional guidance. Once a decision has been made, the Reviewer may reveal the titles of accepted manuscripts and the names of their authors.
• Reviewer must prioritize the author's intellectual autonomy.
• Reviewer must obtain permission from the author before using any unpublished information or interpretations revealed in a submitted manuscript for their personal research.
• If a manuscript is found to be closely related to a Reviewer, creating a conflict of interest, the Reviewer must arrange for another qualified individual to take on Reviewer's responsibility for the manuscript.
• If a Reviewer receives convincing evidence that the main content or conclusions of a previously published report in their journal are incorrect, they must publish a suitable report or notation that acknowledges the error and, if possible, corrects it.
• An author may request that the Reviewer refrains from utilizing specific reviewers during the evaluation process of a manuscript.
• It is recommended that Reviewer send a PDF format instead of Microsoft Word or any other electronic file to the reviewers. Additionally, it is advised to request that comments not be made to the electronic copy of the manuscript to ensure accuracy.

​

These are the general and ethical guidelines you need to adhere to achieve the quality output of a research paper.