The article submitted shall be evaluated based on the review form available in the reviewer account's dashboard. Reviewers are also suggested to give direct comments on the articles document file.

>> The reviews are generally expected to be a valuable learning input for our authors. Reviewers can use these questions to provide assessments to the articles. <<

Title
Does it clearly describe the article?

Abstract
Does it reflect the content of the article?

Introduction
Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated?
Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context and explain what other authors' findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis(es), and the general experimental design or method.

Method
Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected?
Is the design suitable for answering the question posed?
Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research?
Does the article identify the procedures followed?
Are these ordered in a meaningful way?
If the methods are new, are they explained in detail?
Was the sampling appropriate?
Have the equipment and materials been adequately described?
Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?

Results
This is where the author/s should explain in words what he/she discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted.
Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.

Conclusion/Discussion
Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable?
Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and to earlier research?
Does the article support or contradict previous theories?
Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?

Tables, Figures, Images
Are they appropriate?
Do they properly show the data?
Are they easy to interpret and understand?

Scope
Is the article in line with the aims and scope of the journal?