The primary purpose of peer review is to provide the editors of the European Journal of Chemistry with the information needed to reach a fair, evidence-based decision that adheres to the editorial criteria of the European Journal of Chemistry.

Review reports should also help authors revise their manuscript to ensure that it is accepted for publication. Reports accompanied by a recommendation to reject the manuscript should explain the major weaknesses of the research; this will help the authors prepare their manuscript for submission to a different journal.

Peer reviewers should adhere to the principles of COPE's Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Confidential comments to the editors are welcome, but must not contradict the main points of the report for the authors.

Peer reviewers should evaluate manuscripts exclusively in accordance with the publication ethics criteria of the European Journal of Chemistry.

The following conventions should be respected:

Reviewers should review the Referee Guidelines and the publication ethics criteria of the European Journal of Chemistry before taking on the reviewer role.

The maintenance of confidentiality is a requirement for all manuscripts submitted to the European Journal of Chemistry for evaluation.

Reviewers should declare any potential competing interests. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they believe to have a competing interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript.

Peer review gives the author the opportunity to improve the manuscript and helps the editor make decisions about what to edit. In this regard, a referee who feels unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or who believes that they will not be able to finish the evaluation in a reasonable amount of time should decline the offer to review.

Reviews must be conducted objectively and impartially. Referees should be aware of their own biases and take this into consideration when evaluating a piece of manuscript.

Referees should refrain from personally contacting the authors or disclosing their comments or information about the manuscript.

A referee should not conduct independent research using information from the manuscript without the author's clear written consent.

Personal criticism with defamatory/libelous remarks of the author is inappropriate.

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references.

Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the material provided to them and do not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work.

If a referee proposes that an author include citations to the work of the referee (or their associates), this should be done for legitimate scientific reasons and not to increase the referee's citation count or the prominence of their work.

Any reviewer who wants to pass on a peer review invitation to a colleague must first contact the European Journal of Chemistry.

Referees consider the scientific merit of the manuscript in the context of the following inquiries. (i) In terms of content, scope, and methodology, is the study scientific? (ii) Do the study's findings contribute to the field's advancement and offer original data? (iii) Does the study present the author’s interpretations and a critical evaluation of primary and/or contemporary sources? Has the study been successful in achieving its intended objectives? (iv) Are the figures, tables, images, etc. used, as well as the title, subtitles, abstract, and conclusion sections appropriate for the study content?

Concerns related to these points, or any aspect of the review process, should be raised with the editorial team.