Reviewers of QJCS should evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, independently, and confidentially.

1. RELEVANCE AND SCOPE

Assess whether the manuscript:

• Fits QJCS's Aims and Scope
• Addresses a relevant coaching or sports-science topic
• Makes a meaningful contribution

2. ORIGINALITY

Assess whether:

• The research question is meaningful
• The contribution is clearly identified
• The manuscript provides new evidence, interpretation, methodology, or theoretical insight

3. LITERATURE

Assess whether:

• Relevant scholarship is discussed
• The research gap is clear
• The conceptual framework is suitable
• References are relevant and credible

4. METHODOLOGY

Assess:

• Study design
• Sample or participants
• Procedures
• Measurements
• Statistical methods
• Ethical requirements

5. RESULTS

Assess whether:

• Results are clearly presented
• Analyses support the findings
• Tables and figures are appropriate
• Claims are evidence-based

6. DISCUSSION

Assess whether:

• Findings are appropriately interpreted
• Results are compared with existing literature
• Alternative explanations are considered
• Implications are appropriate

7. CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS

Assess whether:

• Conclusions follow from evidence
• Limitations are acknowledged
• Recommendations are justified

8. RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Report concerns involving:

• Plagiarism
• Duplicate publication
• Fabricated data
• Manipulated data or images
• Unethical research
• Fabricated references
• Citation manipulation
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest

9. RECOMMENDATION

Provide a clear recommendation supported by scholarly reasoning.

Reviewer comments should remain respectful, specific, constructive, and evidence-based.