Assess the paper’s central claim
Can a reader identify the question, contribution and evidence without guessing? We check whether the abstract and conclusion are supported by the body of the paper and whether important limitations have been acknowledged.
Look for reproducibility and reporting gaps
Depending on the study, this may include the data source, sampling, instruments, analysis choices, code availability, theoretical assumptions or source-selection method. Missing information is listed as a query; it is not filled with invented detail.
Prioritize the revision work
Separate major issues that affect interpretation from language and formatting corrections. A useful report explains the issue, the reason it matters and a practical next action. You decide what further analysis or research can be undertaken.
Prepare for the target journal
Review scope, article category and required files against current instructions. A pre-submission review is advisory and separate from the journal’s independent peer-review process; it does not reproduce or guarantee that process.
Scope, files and delivery
Start with a short project brief. We assess the work, discuss the expertise required and confirm the deliverables, fee, schedule and included revisions in writing. Share the current version and the instructions that govern it. Additional data, a new target journal or a substantially changed brief may require a revised scope. You review the proposed changes and retain responsibility for the research.