Reviewer Guidelines

Warning: Attempt to read property "journal_name" on null in /home/ioampico/public_html/furthersci.org/reviewer-guidelines.php on line 43
follows a single-anonymous (single-blind) peer review process, in which the identities of reviewers remain confidential while the authors' identities are disclosed to reviewers. Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring the quality, accuracy, originality, and integrity of the research published in the journal.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted for review must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, reproduce, or use any part of the manuscript for personal or professional advantage. Communication with the authors outside the editorial process is strictly prohibited.

Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:
2 Provide objective, impartial, and constructive evaluations.
Focus comments on the scientific content and avoid personal criticism.
Declare any potential conflicts of interest, including financial, academic, institutional, or personal relationships.
Decline the review if they are not sufficiently qualified or cannot complete the review within the requested timeframe.
Notify the Editor of any suspected ethical issues, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, or other research misconduct.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

Originality and Significance

Does the manuscript present novel research or meaningful advancements in applied mathematics, science, or engineering?
Does the work make a valuable contribution to the existing literature?

Technical and Scientific Quality

Are the research methods, mathematical models, experimental design, simulations, or computational approaches appropriate and scientifically sound?
Are the analyses accurate, reproducible, and adequately described?

Clarity and Organization

Is the manuscript logically organized and clearly written?
Are the objectives, methodology, results, and conclusions presented in a coherent manner?

Results and Interpretation

Are the results clearly presented and adequately supported by data, analysis, or mathematical proofs?
Are the conclusions justified by the findings?

References

Are the references relevant, current, and appropriately cited?
Have the authors adequately acknowledged previous research?

Ethical Compliance

Where applicable, has the research complied with relevant ethical standards, including institutional approval and informed consent for studies involving human participants or animals?

Review Report

Reviewers are encouraged to structure their reports as follows:
General Comments: Overall assessment of the manuscript's quality, originality, and suitability for publication.
Specific Comments: Detailed feedback on individual sections, such as the Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Figures, Tables, and References.
Confidential Comments to the Editor: Any concerns regarding ethical issues, publication suitability, or other matters not intended for the authors.
Recommendation: One of the following recommendations:
Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject
Constructive suggestions that help authors improve the manuscript are strongly encouraged.

Timeliness

Reviewers are requested to submit their review within 4–5 weeks of accepting the invitation. If additional time is required, reviewers should inform the editorial office as soon as possible.

Open Access Policy

Applied Mathematics on Science and Engineering is an open access journal. Accepted articles are published online with unrestricted access, ensuring that research is freely available to readers worldwide. Reviewers are encouraged to uphold high standards of scientific quality, transparency, and reproducibility.

Reporting Guidelines

Where appropriate, reviewers are encouraged to consider recognized reporting standards, including those provided by the EQUATOR Network, such as:
CONSORT (Randomized Controlled Trials)
STROBE (Observational Studies)
PRISMA (Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)
CARE (Case Reports)
These guidelines help improve the completeness, transparency, and quality of published research.

Reviewer Recognition

The editorial team sincerely appreciates the valuable time, expertise, and dedication of reviewers. Their contributions are essential in maintaining the scientific excellence and integrity of Applied Mathematics on Science and Engineering. All review activities are handled confidentially in accordance with the journal's peer-review policy.