Reviewer Guidelines
1. Presentation
- Ensure that the manuscript is well-organized and clearly presented. Check for appropriate formatting, including headings, subheadings, and overall structure.
2. Writing
- Evaluate the clarity and coherence of the writing. The language should be precise, formal, and free of grammatical errors. Ensure that the manuscript adheres to academic writing standards.
3. Length
- Assess whether the manuscript meets the journal's length requirements. Articles should be concise yet comprehensive, avoiding unnecessary verbosity.
4. Title
- The title should be informative, accurately reflecting the content and focus of the manuscript. It should be engaging and concise, ideally under 15 words.
5. Abstract
- Review the abstract for clarity and completeness. It should succinctly summarize the key objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the study, typically within 250 words.
6. Introduction
- The introduction should clearly state the research problem, objectives, and significance of the study. Review for a clear context and background that justifies the research.
7. Method
- Evaluate the appropriateness and rigor of the research methods employed. The methodology should be detailed enough to allow replication. Check for ethical considerations and any necessary approvals.
8. Result
- Assess the presentation of results, ensuring that they are clearly stated and supported by data. Tables, figures, and graphs should be used effectively and clearly labeled.
9. Discussion
- The discussion should interpret the results in the context of existing literature. Review for coherence, critical analysis, and the acknowledgment of limitations. Ensure that the implications for community empowerment are clearly articulated.
10. Conclusion
- The conclusion should summarize the key findings and their relevance to community empowerment. Review for clarity and the inclusion of recommendations for future research or practice.