Introduction

Reviews help the editor to decide on the scientific merits of submitted articles and also enables the author to improve the manuscript. The review process is an essential aspect of the publication process of any scientific paper. The JNSM follows a double-blind peer review process system. Reviewers must ensure that the manuscript is within their area of expertise. Also, they need to dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the paper.

Conflict of Interest

In case a conflict of interest does exist, reviewers should declare the conflict the interest. And thus decline the participation in the peer-review process.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must ensure that the review processes are confidential. Manuscripts are classified items given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. All the manuscript and the review process details should be kept confidential throughout, and after, all the review process.

Plagiarism

It could be defined as mentioned in Oxford Dictionaries, "The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own." Reviewers should not use data acquired through the peer-review process. Not for their own or any other's interest, neither to question or disadvantage others. Reviewers should comply with ICMJE http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/responsibilities-in-the-submission-and-peer-peview-process.html and COPE https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers

Review reports

In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should concentrate on the following points:
• Originality
•Creativity
• Technical quality
• Depth of research
• Addition to the field
• Clarity of presentation

Reviewers should avoid using unfriendly, sarcastic, or accusatory remarks. The feedback report should be accurate, objective, constructive, and unambiguous. Comments should be backed by facts and useful arguments concerning the manuscript content.

Peer-review Reporting Guidelines

The JNSM follows standard reporting guidelines and the NLM review criteria. This guideline would provide the peer reviewer with a defined set of parameters that are required in the manuscript and suggest revisions accordingly. For further details, view and download the peer-review of the JNSM review criteria checklist here

Timeliness

Reviewers should only accept manuscripts that they can allocate proper time in reviewing, and return comments on time.

Recommendations

The recommendation should be backed with constructive comments and facts based on the content of the manuscript.
Reviewers' feedback should be one of the following:
• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

Reviewer recognition

We acknowledge all reviewers for their excellent contribution. The JNSM depends on the reviewers' compassion and energy on evaluating the appropriateness of manuscripts before publication.
Reviewers invest a considerable amount of time and expertise in the peer-review process. It is crucial that they feel supported and recognized in their role. Recognition of reviewers include:
* Reviewer certificate. We have created a certificate of appreciation to serve as a formal acknowledgment of a reviewer's role in the peer-review process. Reviewers can request a certificate from the JNSM.
* Acknowledgment of reviewers. In the first issue of the year, the JNSM publishes the names of scholars who served as reviewers for the JNSM in the previous year.
* Publons. The JNSM and the Wolters Kluwer have partnered with Publons to give you official recognition for your contribution to peer review. This partnership means you can opt-in to have your reviews be recognized and recorded in Publons https://publons.com/journal/118607/journal-of-nature-and-science-of-medicineUpon the completion of your review, you may log in to Publons and add your review assignment.

What is Publons?

Publons helps you to record, verify, and showcase your peer review contributions for use in promotion applications. You get recognition even if your reviews are anonymous, and the manuscript is never published. Take a look at a Publons reviewer profile or browse our top reviewers if you want to learn more. If you'd like to get a head start on your reviewer profile, create an account now (it's free).
Publons gives recognition for peer review without compromising reviewer anonymity or infringing upon journal policies. By default, the content of the review will not be publicly displayed, and only the year of the review and the journal-title will be shown on reviewer profiles. You may edit what is displayed for any revision or opt-out of the service at any time.

Timeliness

Reviewers should only accept manuscripts that they can allocate proper time in reviewing, and return comments on time.