For Reviewers

EJBTI operates a double-blind peer review process. All communication and manuscript handling are conducted electronically through the journal’s submission system. In order to ensure a high standard of publication, all papers submitted to the EJBTI will undergo peer review prior to acceptance for publication. The review process ensures that papers are original, substantial, new, and presented effectively. All submissions should be evaluated objectively, regardless of the writers' affiliation, color, gender, ethnicity, or religion. The review should be neutral, please avoid making offensive comments about the work or its authors.

Confidentiality

Please do not disclose any information obtained during the peer-review process, or use the unpublished materials in your research without the written consent of the Author as paper should be treated as confidential.

Conflicts of Interest

You should disclose any potential conflicts of interest and consult with the journal if you are unsure whether or not something constitutes a relevant interest.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
Provide fair, objective, and constructive evaluations in a timely manner.
Follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Evaluation Criteria

When reviewing a manuscript, please consider the following:

Scope: Does the submission fall within the journal’s focus areas?
Originality: Are the data and findings novel and unpublished elsewhere?
Title & Abstract: Are they concise, clear, and representative of the manuscript’s content?
Clarity: Is the manuscript logically organized and clearly written?
Methodology: Are the research methods appropriate and sufficiently detailed?
Interpretation: Are the findings and conclusions well supported by the data?
Literature: Is the referencing appropriate, current, and comprehensive?
Tables & Figures: Are they necessary, clearly labeled, and effectively presented?
Length: Is the manuscript appropriately scaled to its content and complexity?
Revisions: Are there sections that should be modified, expanded, or omitted?

Review Process

You will be invited to:

Provide detailed comments to the author (visible to both author and editor).
Optionally, include confidential remarks to the editor (visible to the editor only).
Optionally upload an annotated manuscript with tracked comments.

Please select one final recommendation: