EBIOZ follows a double-blind peer review process where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential.

Reviewers should adhere to the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers established by COPE (Council on Publication Ethics), identify any signs of misconduct, and report concerns to the editorial office. It is advisable for reviewers to familiarize themselves with the relevant sections of COPE's Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

In cases of scientific misconduct, fraud, plagiarism, or unethical behavior related to the manuscript, reviewers should promptly notify the editor.

Reviewers must avoid disclosing their identity to authors in their comments or review documents.

Reviewers should refrain from using the manuscript's content to promote their own work and should not cite or refer to the manuscript or its findings before publication.

The unpublished manuscript is confidential, and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of its content, including the abstract, until the paper is published.

Reviewers play a crucial role in upholding the integrity of the scholarly record. They should approach the manuscript with a positive and impartial mindset, aiming to facilitate effective and accurate scientific communication. If a reviewer believes they cannot assess an article impartially, they should promptly return it to the editor with an explanation.

Reviews should be completed in a timely manner (within 2–3 weeks). If a reviewer anticipates being unable to meet the specified deadline, they should inform the editor.

Reviewers are requested to evaluate the manuscript's quality and provide a recommendation to the external editor (accept, revise, or reject). Invited reviewers should:

• Accept or decline invitations promptly based on the manuscript's title and abstract.
• Suggest alternative reviewers if they must decline.
• Request a deadline extension if more time is needed for comprehensive feedback.

Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could introduce bias for or against the paper or authors. If unsure about a potential conflict, reviewers should contact the journal's Editorial Office.

Reviewers should remember that their comments may be included in the decision letter to the author, aiding them in improving the manuscript. When providing feedback:

• Read the entire article, including figures and tables, if available.
• Critically analyze the article as a whole and specific sections.
• Offer detailed comments to ensure authors understand and address the raised points.
• Maintain a neutral tone and provide constructive criticism.
• Reviewers are not expected to correct grammar but may help if desired.

When reviewing a manuscript, consider the following aspects: