Reviewers Guide


Review a manuscript is a privilege. However, it is a time-consuming responsibility. Hence, UEP’s Journal Editorial Board, authors, and audiences appreciate your willingness to accept this responsibility. In so doing, UEP needs reviewers who can provide helpful comments on submitted manuscripts within the determined period of time by the editor. Maintaining UEP as a scientific journal of high quality depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to be objective, fair, and insightful in their evaluation of manuscripts.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

If UEP’s Editor-in-Chief has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following:

  1. Review manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors
  2. Review multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary
  3. Providing all required information within the requested deadlines
  4. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the manuscript they are asked to review
  5. Reporting possible research misconducts
  6. Treating the manuscript as a confidential document
  7. Not communicating directly with authors (If they know the author/s)
  8. Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer
  9. Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work
  10. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under review in any other journal
  11. Writing comments in Original or English language.

What Should Be Checked ?

  1. Novelty
  2. Originality
  3. Scientific reliability
  4. Valuable contribution to the science
  5. Adding new aspects to the existed field of study
  6. Ethical aspects
  7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
  8. References provided to substantiate the content
  9. Grammar, punctuation and spelling
  10. Scientific misconduct