BTI

Instructions to Reviewers

Agree to review manuscripts only if they have a subject expertise requisite for proper assessment of the study.

Declare if they do not have the subject expertise or if they are able to assess only the part of the manuscript. In such case, clearly outline the areas for which they have the relevant expertise.

Should read the manuscript, reviewer instructions, requisite ethical and publication policy statements, supplemental data (files) and journal instructions thoroughly, contact the journal if anything is not clear, missing or incomplete information which is required to carry out a full review.

Should respond in a time-frame (especially, if not able to review), and must not intentionally prolong the review process, either by delaying the submission of their review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from the journal or author.

Should only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident to return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed on time-frame and should inform the journal promptly if they require an extension.

Must keep the confidentiality of peer review and should not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.

Should not use the information obtained during the peer-review process for their personal or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to discredit others.

Should declare any potentially conflicting or competing interests (which may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious), seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.

Should give a prompt intimation to the journal immediately and seek advice if they discover either a conflicting interest that wasn’t apparent when they agreed to the review or anything that might prevent them providing a fair and unbiased review.

Should not involve anyone else in the review of a manuscript, including junior researchers they are mentoring, without first obtaining permission from the journal; the names of any individuals who have helped them with the review should be included with the returned review so that they are associated with the manuscript in the journal’s records and can also receive due credit for their efforts.

If they suspect the identity of the author(s), immediately notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.