Reviewer Policies

Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (Specific to Reviewers)

At BioAI: An Advanced Journal in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Trends in Biological Sciences, reviewers are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest (COI) that could compromise their objectivity in evaluating manuscripts. This ensures the integrity of the peer review process and helps maintain the journal's credibility.

Key aspects of the Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures policy for reviewers include:

  1. Disclosure of Conflicts: Reviewers must disclose any financial, professional, or personal relationships that could influence their assessment of a manuscript. This includes relationships with the authors, competing interests, or financial ties to organizations that could benefit from the research being reviewed.

  2. Recusal: If a reviewer has a conflict of interest with a manuscript (e.g., being a co-author, having received funding from the same organization, or having a close personal relationship with the authors), they are expected to recuse themselves from the review process for that particular submission.

  3. Transparency: Any potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed before the review process begins. If a reviewer fails to disclose such conflicts and it is later discovered, the manuscript may be reassigned to another reviewer, or the manuscript may be reconsidered based on the new information.

  4. Non-financial Conflicts: COIs are not limited to financial relationships but also include non-financial interests that may affect a reviewer’s impartiality. For example, professional rivalries, personal biases, or academic collaborations with the authors should also be declared.

  5. Ethical Conduct: Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and integrity during the review process. Disclosing a conflict of interest ensures that any biases are addressed and that the review remains unbiased, fair, and objective.

    Reviewers Guidelines

    BioAI has a set of Reviewers Guidelines that outline the expectations and procedures for reviewers. These guidelines are designed to help reviewers conduct thorough, fair, and objective assessments of manuscripts submitted to the journal. Below are key aspects of the Reviewers Guidelines:

    1. Responsibilities of Reviewers:

      • Evaluation of Originality and Significance: Reviewers assess the novelty and scientific importance of the work, ensuring it contributes meaningfully to the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning in biological sciences.
      • Methodological Rigor: Reviewers examine the soundness of the methodology, the appropriateness of the data analysis, and the validity of the conclusions drawn from the study.
      • Clarity and Structure: The manuscript's clarity, organization, and logical flow are evaluated, including the completeness of the introduction, methods, results, and discussion.
      • Relevance to the Journal's Scope: Reviewers ensure that the manuscript fits within the journal's thematic scope, which covers AI/ML applications in biological research.

    2. Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not share, disclose, or use the content of the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.

    3. Impartiality and Objectivity: Reviewers are expected to be impartial and make their evaluations based solely on the manuscript's scientific merit, regardless of the authors' identities or affiliations. Any personal opinions or biases should be kept separate from the review process.

    4. Constructive Feedback: Reviewers provide detailed, constructive feedback to help authors improve their work. This feedback should be respectful, professional, and aimed at enhancing the quality of the research. Reviewers should suggest improvements, but also highlight strengths to encourage authors.

    5. Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the time frame set by the journal. If they are unable to meet the deadline, they must inform the editorial team in advance. Delayed reviews can slow down the publication process, which is why timely feedback is crucial.

    6. Ethical Considerations: Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest in the research. They should report any such concerns to the editorial team immediately.

    7. Encouraging Reproducibility: In AI and machine learning research, reproducibility is a key concern. Reviewers should check whether the authors have provided enough detail about the data, algorithms, and methodologies to allow other researchers to replicate the results.

    8. Revised Manuscripts: If a manuscript requires revisions, reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the authors have adequately addressed the reviewers’ previous comments and suggestions. Reviewers should help editors decide whether the revisions are sufficient to warrant acceptance.

    9. Handling Plagiarism: Reviewers are responsible for identifying potential plagiarism or inappropriate use of others' work. The journal uses plagiarism detection tools, but reviewers are an important safeguard in maintaining academic integrity.