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. Peer review process

Initial Manuscript Screening

Our journal is dedicated to the rapid publication of rigorous, high-quality research. Authors are expected to submit manuscripts that have been thoroughly proofread and refined for clarity, accuracy, and overall presentation. Upon submission, the editorial office conducts a preliminary review of all manuscripts to assess:

  • Ethical approval (if applicable)
  • Plagiarism check
  • Simultaneous submission check
  • Whether the manuscript complies with the double-anonymized review rules

Manuscripts failing to meet these basic standards will be desk rejected without being sent to reviewers. Authors will be informed accordingly.

Manuscripts passing this stage will be assigned to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or an Associate Editor (AE).

Editor Assignment and Reviewer Invitation

After assignment, the editor reviews the manuscript for scope, novelty, and clarity. Suitable manuscripts are sent to at least 2 independent expert reviewers. The review process typically completes within 1-2 months, depending on schedules.

Feedback to Authors

Based on reviewers’ comments, the editor provides detailed feedback. Decisions may include acceptance, minor/major revision, or rejection.

Revised Manuscript Handling

Revised manuscripts are reassessed by the original handling editor and reviewers. The final decision is based on updated reviewer comments and editor assessment.

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or designated editor makes the final decision on all manuscripts. This decision is final and binding.

4. 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.

5. 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

Make an overall recommendation

Choose one:

  • Accept: Meets journal standards; ready for publication.
  • Minor Revisions: Small adjustments needed; typically 5 days for revision.
  • Major Revisions: Substantial improvements required; typically 20 days for revision.
  • Reject: Not suitable due to critical issues; resubmission not considered.

Provide feedback

  • Strengths: Highlight positive aspects of the work.
  • Weaknesses: Point out areas needing improvement.

6. 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.

7. Confidentiality

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