Recently I have been appointed as a reviewer for an IEEE journal in CS. This journal is indexed on Scimago and its ranking is a Q3 journal.
I know that one cannot know all the topics covered in the diverse areas of CS, but as a reviewer, I have been assigned some papers that do not specifically belong to my field of expertise. Even though the journal appears to check the familiarity of the reviewer with the topic before reviewing it, I just feel it is not close enough.
Apart of that sometimes I get some papers in which the practical part or the methodological part is jumped quickly, and for me, it lacks consistency and is rather descriptive; I know the limitations of space, but I believe some authors should put more effort on that section.
Also, how can I know that the results that they present are for real? I have read many cases in which some authors fake their own results or push them to show nice results when in reality is not like that.
What to do in the aforementioned situations?