Abstract:
The reviewer of scientific articles constitutes an essential part of the editorial process. All manuscripts submitted to a journal are evaluated through a process called peer review, in which reviewers assess the quality of the work and advise the editor on whether or not it should be published. This system guarantees that the articles published have no conflict of interest, do not have methodological biases invalidating their conclusions, and their results are relevant to the scientific community. A good reviewer must have some experience in the subject of the article being evaluated, no conflict of interest, whether personal or financial, and have sufficient time to deliver the review within the established deadline. In addition, he or she must know how to analyze the different parts of the manuscript and write the letter of recommendation with comments justifying his or her decision. This article will discuss the ten characteristics of a good reviewer and also the professional enrichment involved in evaluating a scientific article.
