Becoming a Reviewer

Register as a REVIEWER

You can use This Form to submit your information as a reviewer.


AIMPC 2021 Reviewer Instructions

We ask all respected editors and reviewers to evaluate each manuscript according to the following minimum criteria.


Would publication of the article make a positive contribution to the scientific literature? What would you gain by reading it? An article’s contribution does not need to be new or unpublished results; for example, it can have the following attributes:

  • New explanations of familiar topics
  • Excellent descriptions or explanations of complex subjects
  • Tutorials or review articles
  • Useful or interesting background information
  • Enjoyable and informed historical perspective or overview
  • Be more than an abstract (we reject 1-page, abstract-only articles)
  • Have merit (through its rigor, accuracy, or correctness)
  • Be original (previously unpublished and solely the work of the author)

Include an abstract (with a sufficient summary of the paper and outline of goals, results and conclusion, including conveying sufficient understanding when read in isolation from the paper)

  • Have an adequate title (correctly describes the article such that reading it alone would convey the nature and content)
  • Have reasonable conclusions (based on the results presented, or ideas/concepts discussed)
  • Is clear and concise (well-expressed ideas readable and understandable by its intended readership)
  • Uses correct English (sufficiently conveys the science and intent/meaning or purpose). Poorly written papers will be returned to the authors for re-writing or will be rejected if the author is unable or unwilling to make the recommended improvements.


References will depend on the type of article; however, here are some general questions you may like to consider.

  • Do the references look appropriate for the topic? Are key papers missing that you would expect to see?
  • Is the distribution of journals and publications cited, and age of the citations, appropriate?
  • Do the references demonstrate that the author is aware of current and key research in their field?
  • Please note any suggestion that the author includes citations to reviewers’ (or their associates’) work must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing reviewers’ citation counts or enhancing the visibility of reviewers’ work (or that of their associates).