Peer Reviewers

The Journal has a two-stage review process.

The first stage is a screening review by the Editor-in-Chief. At this stage, the plagiarism score and article structure will be reviewed. If the score from the Plagiarism Detector is higher than 20%, the article will be rejected. The article structure must follow the template.

The second stage is editorial and content review by the editor and peer reviewers. The editor will review: The relevance of each section's content to the section title; The clarity of images and tables; Reference numbers in the main body.

ZETROEM uses a double-blind review process for content review by peer reviewers. Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, and vice versa. One article will be assigned to one reviewer. The content of each article will be reviewed based on the following criteria:
1. Relevance of the article to the Focus and Scope of ZETROEM
2. Appeal of the study/research for publication
3. Novelty of the content
4. Clarity of the research gap
5. Suitability of the methods to the research objectives
6. Quality and quantity of data to draw conclusions
7. Suitability of statistical analysis in the article
8. Relevance of references and content
9. Quality of images and tables
10. Reliability of the article

The final decision on the acceptance of each article will be made based on the reviewers' comments. Articles will be sent back to the authors for revision based on the comments of the editors and reviewers.

Both stages of review are expected to be completed within 30 to 60 days for each article. Accepted research articles will be available online (free download).

All articles published in Open Access will be immediately and permanently free to read and download for everyone. We continue to work with our author community to select the best licensing options.