Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the scientific quality, technical excellence, research integrity, and credibility of the Metro Journal of Modern Science Modern Science (MJMS). The journal expects reviewers to provide objective, fair, timely, confidential, and constructive evaluations of submitted manuscripts while adhering to the highest standards of professional ethics.

• Review only manuscripts that fall within their area of expertise and technical competence.
• Accept review invitations only if they can provide a thorough and timely evaluation within the specified review period.
• Maintain strict confidentiality regarding all manuscript content and related communications throughout and after the review process.
• Disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment and decline the review if impartiality may be compromised.

• Originality and innovation
• Scientific and technical merit
• Research methodology and experimental design
• Engineering significance and practical applicability
• Quality of data analysis, validation, and interpretation
• Clarity, organization, and technical presentation
• Adequacy and relevance of references
• Compliance with ethical standards and journal policies

• Provide constructive, respectful, and evidence-based comments that assist authors in improving the quality of their manuscripts.
• Support recommendations with clear reasoning, technical observations, and specific suggestions for improvement wherever appropriate.
• Report suspected publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, image manipulation, unethical research practices, or other ethical concerns, to the Editorial Office.
• Not use or disclose any unpublished information, ideas, data, or findings obtained through the peer-review process for personal research, professional advantage, or third-party benefit.
• Submit review reports through the journal's online manuscript management system within the assigned deadline and notify the Editorial Office promptly if additional time is required.

Following evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following editorial decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The MJMS follows internationally recognized double-blind peer-review, publication ethics, and research integrity standards to ensure a transparent, objective, confidential, and high-quality manuscript evaluation process. The final editorial decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, who considers reviewers’ recommendations together with the journal’s editorial policies and publication standards.