Faculty of Graduate Studies | ☎ +94 112 903 952 | ✉︎ fgs@kln.ac.lk
Guidelines for Reviewers
Journal of Multidisciplinary and Translational Studies take pride in following a high standardized peer review process that enhances the accuracy and high quality of its articles.
Submission Preparation Checklist
The reviewer's role entails critically examining and evaluating a manuscript within their subject expertise, offering constructive and respectful feedback to authors. This feedback should address the strengths and weaknesses of the article and suggest ways to enhance its quality, coherence, and originality.
Before Reviewing
1. Accept the manuscripts which fall into his/her area of expertise to maintain the high standards of the journal.
2. Ensure whether he/she can review the article within two weeks . If the deadline can be met, proceed with the review. However, if there are difficulties meeting the deadline, inform the Chief Editor promptly.
3. Adhere to the conflicts of interest policies and refrain from reviewing manuscripts of such cases including manuscripts that are co-authored by the reviewer himself/herself.
2. Ensure whether he/she can review the article within two weeks . If the deadline can be met, proceed with the review. However, if there are difficulties meeting the deadline, inform the Chief Editor promptly.
3. Adhere to the conflicts of interest policies and refrain from reviewing manuscripts of such cases including manuscripts that are co-authored by the reviewer himself/herself.
The Review
The article should align with the scope of the journal and maintain high standards of content quality and originality. It should ensure that all data and interpretations are clear and understandable, and the review process should be comprehensively addressed.
1. Focus on the paper’s critical evaluation and make sure to meticulously check reviews before submission, since reviews directly affect the last decision of the editor.
2. Verify the paper on its accuracy, relevancy, novelty, standards, importance, and sufficiency to be warranted a publication.
3. Ensure all the key elements of the study: abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, conclusions are present, adequately explained and follows a logical sequence in the paper.
4. Check whether the Title of the research and Abstract of the paper reflects the content of the article.
5. Confirm whether the data collection methods and gathered data statistics are accurate.
6. Overall, verify the information, statistics, references in the paper are correct.
7. Examine whether the conclusions of the paper are sound and sensible, matching well with the contents and findings of the paper.
8. Do not correct language errors, however, you may bring it to the attention of the editor.
9. Provided that a certain article expands past research, ensure it refers to that study appropriately and malpractices are non.
2. Verify the paper on its accuracy, relevancy, novelty, standards, importance, and sufficiency to be warranted a publication.
3. Ensure all the key elements of the study: abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, conclusions are present, adequately explained and follows a logical sequence in the paper.
4. Check whether the Title of the research and Abstract of the paper reflects the content of the article.
5. Confirm whether the data collection methods and gathered data statistics are accurate.
6. Overall, verify the information, statistics, references in the paper are correct.
7. Examine whether the conclusions of the paper are sound and sensible, matching well with the contents and findings of the paper.
8. Do not correct language errors, however, you may bring it to the attention of the editor.
9. Provided that a certain article expands past research, ensure it refers to that study appropriately and malpractices are non.
Ethical considerations 1. Every reviewer is bound by confidentiality policies. Thus, they should uphold confidentiality of the presented papers. Revealing the assigned paper's data, results, or videos/images or any of the supplementary material to third parties is prohibited. After receiving the paper, contact only the editor for any further assistance or clarifications.
2. The identity of the reviewers should remain unknown to the authors, during the process of review and after its publication.
3. All recommendations must maintain integrity. If the conduct of the reviewer is deemed unethical then the manuscript will be assigned to a second reviewer.
4. The reviewer may inform the editor regarding suspected duplicate publication, plagiarism, or lack of ethical clearances from the author’s side.
