International Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology Nexovation
Duties of Reviewers
The peer review process is a cornerstone of editorial decision-making at the International Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology Nexovation (IJCOGN). Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the scientific quality, accuracy, and integrity of published work. Through detailed and thoughtful feedback, reviewers help editors make informed decisions and support authors in enhancing the quality of their manuscripts—especially in the complex and evolving domains of obstetrics and gynecology. IJCOGN recognizes that active participation in peer review is a professional responsibility shared by all scholars and clinicians contributing to the advancement of women’s health.
Timeliness
Reviewers are expected to complete manuscript evaluations within the designated timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess a manuscript (e.g., outside their clinical expertise), or if they anticipate delays, they should promptly inform the editorial team and decline the invitation. This allows the journal to assign the manuscript to a more suitable reviewer and ensures timely dissemination of critical clinical findings.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, discuss, or share the manuscript or its contents with others unless explicitly authorized by the Editor-in-Chief in exceptional cases. Maintaining confidentiality is essential in protecting patient privacy, unpublished data, and the overall integrity of the peer review process—especially in sensitive medical research involving human subjects.
Objectivity and Constructive Feedback
Reviews should be objective, professional, and focused strictly on the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should provide evidence-based, constructive comments that guide authors in improving their work, with attention to clinical methodology, statistical rigor, ethical compliance, and the implications of findings for medical practice. Personal criticism or unsubstantiated judgments against authors are unacceptable and undermine scholarly discourse.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers are encouraged to identify relevant prior studies, especially those involving clinical trials, systematic reviews, or landmark findings that the authors may have overlooked. They should ensure that proper citations are included for all referenced claims. Additionally, reviewers must alert the editorial team if they detect plagiarism, data duplication, or significant similarities with other known works (published or unpublished), particularly those involving clinical data or case reports.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript, including personal, professional, institutional, or financial connections with the authors or their organizations. If such conflicts exist, the reviewer should decline the invitation to ensure an unbiased evaluation process.
Furthermore, reviewers must not use any unpublished information or insights from the manuscript in their own work without the explicit written consent of the authors. All privileged information acquired through peer review must be kept strictly confidential and must not be used for personal gain under any circumstance. This standard applies even if the reviewer declines to conduct the review after viewing the manuscript.
By upholding these standards, the International Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology Nexovation ensures a rigorous, fair, and ethical peer review process, strengthening the quality and credibility of published clinical research in women’s health.