Instruction for Reviewers

1. What is peer review?

Peer review is the process by which experts in a specific field or discipline evaluate the validity, quality, and often the originality of a peer’s research, in order to determine its suitability for publication. This process may also foster networking opportunities within research communities.

Peer review is a critical component of scientific evaluation and serves as the foundation for safeguarding the quality and integrity of scholarly research. Although it has certain limitations, it remains the widely accepted method for research validation.

2. TBench’s Peer Review model

Double-anonymized Peer Review

This journal uses double-anonymized review, which means the authors' identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa.

3.  How peer reviewers are selected?

The handling editors invite at least two reviewers per manuscript. Reviewer selection follows these principles:

  • Reviewers should have expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.
  • Reviewers should have no conflicts of interest with any of the authors.
  • Reviewers should accept assignments only if they can review the manuscript fairly and without bias.

4. How to perform a review and prepare a review report

If you agree to review a manuscript, follow these steps:

-Before you review

  • Have you read the journal’s instructions for reviewers?
  • Do you understand the peer review process of the journal?
  • Do you know the journal’s aims and scope?

-Start your review

Familiarize Yourself with the Journal

Read the journal’s official website, its Aims and Scope, and Instructions for Authors.

Review the Manuscript in Detail

Examine all components, including tables, figures, and supplementary materials. Pay attention to:

  • Originality and relevance
  • Methodological rigor
  • Evidence and conclusions

Write a report （Recommended template）

Make an overall recommendation

Choose one:

  • Accept: Meets journal standards; ready for publication.
  • Minor Revisions: Small adjustments needed; typically two to four weeks days for revision.
  • Major Revisions: Substantial improvements required; typically one to three months for revision.
  • Reject: Not suitable due to critical issues; resubmission not considered.

Provide feedback

  • Summary: Briefly summarize the aims, methods, key findings, and significance of the manuscript. Provide an overall assessment of the study’s originality, scientific quality, and relevance to the journal.
  • Strengths: Highlight positive aspects of the work.
  • Weaknesses: Point out areas needing improvement.

5. Ethical guidelines and Responsibilities for peer reviewers

Peer reviewers should evaluate manuscripts fairly, objectively, and confidentially. Follow COPE Ethical Guidelines: COPE Guidelines.

  • Evaluate manuscripts solely on academic merit.
  • Disclose conflicts of interest.
  • Treat all manuscripts as confidential.
  • Provide clear, respectful, evidence-based feedback.
  • Prepare reviews independently and avoid using AI tools.
  • Submit reviews on time.
  • Inform editors of plagiarism, duplication, or ethical issues.

6. Confidentiality

All manuscripts are confidential until publication. Reviewers must not share content or use it in AI tools. Reviewers’ identities remain anonymous.