The peer-review process is a crucial part of a journal in the publication process in maintaining high-quality standards. At least two potential reviewers review the manuscript submitted to JPP. Reviewers are requested to assess the quality of the manuscripts and provide recommendations to the editor on the manuscript for accepting, rejecting or revisions. We are determined to recognize the labours of reviewers.

Benefits of Volunteer Reviewers

When reviewing for JPP, the reviewer will:

Confidentiality

Reviewers should be confidential about the manuscript's content. They must be aware of revealing their identity to the authors. The reviewer will receive email notification of other reviewers' reports after submission of the review report. The review report and authors' responses will not publish on the journal website. Reviewers can evaluate the manuscript independently and must complete the review report form.

Conflicts of Interests

Reviewers should inform the journal editor if any conflict of interests arises that may bias the review and influences the report.

Review Process

JPP uses a double-blind review system until the review process is completed. An invitation to review the manuscript to each reviewer will be sent by email or from the Journal management system. A title and abstract of the manuscript will be sent via email to the reviewer as an invitation for review. Reviewers are discouraged to mention their citation of their work and their colleagues if it is not necessary to improve the quality of the manuscript under review.

After accepting the review invitation, the reviewer will receive a full manuscript through email or access by the Journal management system. The reviewer must be strict about the plagiarism of the article and must notify the editorial office immediately if anything catches on their eyes.

A reviewer has to submit his or her review report within two weeks after accepting the editorial office's invitation. If they require additional time, they must request to the editorial office.

Review Report

The review report comprises:

A summary: Outlining the manuscript in a short paragraph regarding its main scientific contribution, aim and objectives.

General comments: Comments on each part of the manuscript (title, abstract, introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion, conclusion and underlining areas of strength and weakness). These comments must be clearly described for the authors to be able to respond.

Specific comments: Reviewer can express their specific comments to the editor for improving the quality of the manuscript

Please download the manuscript evaluation form

For further guidance about writing a critical review, please refer to the following documents:

COPE with Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Committee on Publication Ethics. Available online.