As a distinguished reviewer of Synthesis and Sintering, your recommendations play a crucial role in shaping the fate of a manuscript. Here’s a guide on how to provide effective recommendations:

Confidential Comments to Editors

• Use this section to communicate recommendations and any concerns about malpractice or ethical issues.
• Report suspected plagiarism, fraud, unethical procedures, bias, or conflicts of interest.
• We prefer such comments to be provided to editors only, separate from comments to authors.

Recommending Acceptance

• Provide detailed reasons why the manuscript should be accepted.
• Highlight the strengths of the research and its significance to the field.
• Offer suggestions for any areas that could be improved, even though acceptance is recommended.

Recommending Revision

• Specify whether major or minor revisions are necessary for publication.
• Provide specific, constructive feedback on how to address the identified issues.
• Offer suggestions for improving clarity, methodology, or analysis.
• Encourage the authors to address each point raised in the review.

Recommending Rejection

• Clearly state the recommendation for rejection if the manuscript does not meet publication standards.
• Provide specific reasons why the manuscript is not suitable for publication.
• Even when recommending rejection, offer constructive criticism to help authors improve future submissions.
• Focus on the research’s shortcomings rather than personal criticisms.
• Explain to the editor why the manuscript should not be published, providing detailed reasons.