Information for Reviewers (NSE)*
Please click the "Login" button from the menu provided at nse.edmgr.com and login to the system as "Reviewer." You may then view and/or download manuscripts assigned to you for review or submit your comments to the editor.
Updating Your Information with Editorial Manager
If you receive a request to review but have not registered with Editorial Manager, it means that either the journal's Editor or the journal office registered you into the system as a potential reviewer. Your username and password will be provided in the email with the review request. Your username and password is confidential to you, therefore you need to store this carefully.
When you log into the system for the first time, please go to "Update my Information" in the navigation bar at the top of the page. There you can change your username and password, verify that the information provided is correct, and add more pertinent contact details.
General Peer Review Information
Generally, manuscripts are sent to 2-3 referees. The identity of referees is strictly confidential and you are requested to not communicate directly with the authors. You are also asked to not disclose your identity to the authors or discuss the papers you have reviewed with colleagues unless the paper has been published.
The Editor of the journal will invite you to serve as a reviewer of a manuscript. If invited, you will receive an e-mail invitation. You then must log on to the site at nse.edmgr.com using your username and password or hotlinks provided in the e-mail. After reviewing the abstract or previewing the manuscript, you can then agree or decline to review the manuscript. If you agree, you then are requested to read the manuscript, and respond through the review site to submit a review. You may also decline to review the manuscript if you have a conflict of interest, if it is outside your scope of expertise, or if you are unable to complete the review during the time requested.
Performing the Manuscript Review
When reviewing the submitted contribution, please consider the following list of questions, at least partially, in your review.**
- Is the subject of interest to the readership of Nuclear Science & Engineering?
- Is this an original contribution?
- Are title and abstract adequate to the content of the paper?
- Does it give adequate credit to earlier work in the field? If not, please include the omitted references.
- Is it correct and complete? List technical errors or unjustified conclusions.
- Is it clearly presented?
- Should it be published:
- As a technical paper?
- As a technical note?***
- As a computer code abstract?
- Do you recommend:
- Publication in the present form?
- Publication after revision along the lines indicated?
- A complete rewrite?
If revision or rejection is indicated, please give detailed, specific, and substantive comments.