Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scientific quality and ethical standards of Diabzen. Their impartial and expert evaluation ensures that only high-quality, relevant, and original work is published in the fields of cardio-diabetes-renal medicine and health technology.

1. Confidentiality

●      All manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents.

●      Reviewers should not share, discuss, or distribute manuscripts or their contents with anyone outside the peer review process.

2. Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

●      Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal or professional bias.

●   Feedback should be clear, constructive, and aimed at enhancing the quality of the manuscript, focusing on strengths as well as specific areas for improvement.

●      Unprofessional, abusive, or dismissive language must be strictly avoided.

3. Expertise and Fairness

●     Reviewers should accept assignments only if they have adequate subject expertise and can provide an unbiased, thorough evaluation within the agreed timeframe.

●   If the manuscript falls outside the reviewer’s area of expertise, or there is a potential or actual conflict of interest, they must promptly inform the editors.

4. Evaluation Criteria

●      Assess the novelty, scientific rigor, validity of methodology and data analysis, and relevance to Diabzen’s focus.

●      Confirm that ethical standards (including IRB approval and informed consent, as applicable) are met.

●      Check for appropriate citation of prior work and originality, reporting any suspected plagiarism or ethical misconduct to the editorial office.

5. Timeliness

●      Complete reviews within the requested timeframe (usually 3–4 weeks).

●      Notify the editors immediately if a delay is unavoidable, so alternate arrangements can be made.

6. Anonymity

●      Diabzen uses a double-blind review process. Reviewers must avoid language or references that could reveal their identities.

7. Recommendations

●      Provide a clear, reasoned recommendation regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript.

●      Distinguish between major and minor revisions, and ensure that recommendations are supported by evidence and analysis.

8. Ethical Responsibility

●      Declare any conflicts of interest (professional, financial, or personal) that could inappropriately influence the review.

●      Do not use information obtained through peer review for personal advantage, including in research, teaching, or publications.

By upholding these duties, reviewers contribute to Diabzen’s mission of advancing excellence in cardio-diabetes-renal science and technology, and fostering a fair, transparent, and rigorous scholarly publishing environment.