Peer Review

Framework of Peer Review

I. Introduction and Scope

This Policy on Peer Review provides the following: a description of the system, specific policies governing the decorum of peer reviewers, flow of manuscript through the peer review process, settling of disagreements, and guiding principles governing the entire process.

II. Policy Statement

The Journal implements a single blind peer review system: reviewers remain anonymous; authors' identities are disclosed to reviewers. All editorial actions follow COPE Core Practices, ensuring fairness, transparency, and integrity.

III. Procedures

  • Procedure Step 1: The manuscript is uploaded through the portal by the author. The manuscript and accompanying requirements are assessed. A PDF file is generated from the manuscript.
  • Procedure Step 2: The submission is reviewed by the editor/sub-editor/guest editor, and the peer reviewers are selected. (The editors may request the author to suggest peer reviewers [this will also be incorporated in the submissions portal; not required but an option]).
  • Procedure Step 3: The manuscript is forwarded to the assigned peer reviewer.
  • Procedure Step 4: The manuscript undergoes peer review, and 4 recommendations are possible: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, rejection.
  • Procedure Step 5: The recommendations of peer reviewers are forwarded to the editor.
  • Procedure Step 6: The editor will forward the review to the author. The revisions are performed by the author and forwarded by the editor to the peer reviewers for evaluation.
  • Procedure Step 7: The final recommendation is made by the editor based on peer reviewer recommendations (cross-check EIC/Guest Editor role). Accepted manuscripts are forwarded to the copyeditors, and layouting is performed subsequently.
  • Procedure Step 8: The article is published and indexed.
  • Procedure Step 9: Corrections in the form of erratum (publisher error) and corrigendum (author error) are reviewed, accepted, and published.

IV. Responsibilities

The following individuals and groups are responsible for implementing and enforcing editorial policy.

  • Editor-in-Chief: Conducts a quick review of submissions to ensure fit of the article for the scope and standards of the publication, supervises the assignments of peer reviewers, settles discordant decisions in acceptance, revision, and rejection of manuscripts, and referees issues of ethics regarding authorship, data fabrication, and other concerns.
  • Associate Editor: Reads manuscripts and invites experts to review each manuscript, analyzes comments and synthesizes feedback, advises EIC on decisions and disputes.
  • Peer Reviewer: Evaluates the manuscript for study design, methodology, statistical analysis and clinical interpretation, writes a structured report recommending an editorial decision, and provides constructive feedback for the authors.

V. Guide Documents

COPE Council. COPE Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers — English. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9

VI. Review and Revision History

This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.