Peer Review Policy and Process

JCP peer review policy and process comply with COPE guidelines. This policy is designed to evaluate the validity and quality of articles prior to publication. Our peer reviewers ensure that data is clearly presented and findings and conclusions are adequately supported by data. Peer reviewers used by JCP are requested to adhere to the principles of COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer-reviewers.

The author submits the paper to the journal using online submission system. The submitted article is reviewed initially by the editors for adherence to Instructions to the Authors, followed by considering their appropriateness to the scope of journal, plagiarism and originality of the contents. If the editor considers the manuscript to be appropriate, it is then forwarded for peer review process.  JCP gives utmost importance to the transparent double-blind peer-review by at least two independent and anonymous expert referees. The reviewers do not know each other, and the authors do not know anything about the identity of the reviewers. The reviewers are selected by assessing the relevancy reviewer's domain to the submitted manuscript. The reviewers assess the invitation for conflicts of interest and availability. If someone declines, the editor sends invitation to an alternative reviewer. To expedite the process initially two weeks are given to the reviewers for the submission of the report. However, extensions are accommodated to prepare a comprehensive report. The reviewer dedicates time to study the article and prepare a reviewer report, which is submitted along with their recommendation (major revise, minor revise, accept, or reject). The editor considers all the returned reviews before making a decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer for another opinion before deciding. The editor sends a decision to the author, including any relevant reviewer comments. The manuscript with major revisions is subjected to second round of review of revised article. The article with major or minor revision are forwarded to the author for the improvement and clarity. After the complete peer review process, the editor-in-chief finally decides on the acceptance, revision or rejection of the manuscript in light of the reviewer reports. The accepted article is sent to the production.