Welcome to the Reviewer Center- a source of information, guidance and support for reviewing with Engineering Science.

Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, consider the following questions:

● Does the article match your area of expertise? Only accept if you feel you can provide a high-quality review.

● Do you have a potential conflict of interest? Disclose this to the editor when you respond.

● Do you have time? Reviewing can be a lot of work - before you commit, make sure you can meet the deadline.

● Do you need to find out more about reviewing and the peer review process? If so, use this link to find out more information.

● Respond to the invitation as soon as you can (even if it is to decline) - a delay in your decision slows down the review process and means more waiting for the author. If you do decline the invitation, it would be helpful if you could provide suggestions for alternative reviewers.

Confidential material

If you accept, you must treat the materials you receive as confidential documents. This means you can't share them with anyone without prior authorization from the editor. Since peer review is confidential, you also must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors and authors.

How to log in and access your review

Your review will be managed via Engineered Science's submission system. To access the paper and deliver your review, click on the link in the invitation email you received which will bring you to the submission/reviewing system.

Journal-specific instructions

When you sit down to write the review, make sure you familiarize yourself with any journal-specific guidelines (these will be noted in the journal's guide for authors available on each journal's homepage).First read the article. You might consider spot checking major issues by choosing which section to read first. Below we offer some tips about handling specific parts of the paper.

Ethical considerations

Experiments including patient or animal data should properly be documented. Most journals require ethical approval by the author's host organization. Please check journal-specific guidelines for such cases (available from the journal's homepage, accessible via the journal catalogue.

Overview

If you don't spot any major flaws, take a break from the manuscript, giving you time to think. Consider the article from your own perspective. When you sit down to write the review, again make sure you familiarize yourself with any journal-specific guidelines (these will be noted in the journal's guide for authors).

Your review will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. It will also aid the author and allow them to improve their manuscript. Giving your overall opinion and general observations of the article is essential. Your comments should be courteous and constructive, and should not include any ad hominem remarks or personal details including your name (unless the journal you are invited to review for employs open peer review).
Providing insight into any deficiencies is important. You should explain and support your judgement so that both editors and authors are able to fully understand the reasoning behind your comments. You should indicate whether your comments are your own opinion or are reflected by the data and evidence.

reflected by the data and evidence.

The final decision

The editor ultimately decides whether to accept or reject the article. The editor will weigh all views and may call for another opinion or ask the author for a revised paper before making a decision. The submission system provides reviewers with a notification of the final decision.

Once you have delivered your review, you might want to make use of Engineered Science's reviewer recognition platform to ensure that you receive credit for your work. The platform provides a private profile page, certificates, editor recognition as well as discounts for Engineered Science's services.
Your reviewing activities will be automatically captured. Your profile will display your reviewing history and thus demonstrate your input to the peer review process as well as detailing your own articles, positions and editorial work. Do not forget that, even after finalizing your review, you must treat the article and any linked files or data as confidential documents. This means you must not share them or information about the review with anyone without prior authorization from the editor. Finally, we take the opportunity to thank you sincerely on behalf of the journal, editors and author(s) for the time you have taken to give your valuable input to the article.

More questions?

Contact [email protected] with any queries you may have about our reviewing process.