Peer Review Policy
The Journal of Novel Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation (JNPR) is committed to ensuring the integrity, quality, and transparency of its publication process through a rigorous double-blind peer review system. Peer review is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing and ensures that only high-quality, scientifically sound, and relevant research is published.
Objectives of Peer Review
- To evaluate the originality, validity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.
- To provide constructive feedback to authors for improving their manuscripts.
- To ensure fairness, impartiality, and adherence to ethical standards.
- To maintain the scholarly reputation of JNPR as an international open access journal.
Peer Review Process
- Initial Screening: Submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial office for scope, formatting, plagiarism, and compliance with submission guidelines.
- Editorial Assessment: An editor-in-chief or associate editor reviews the submission to determine its suitability for peer review.
- Reviewer Selection: Two or more independent experts are invited to review the manuscript based on their expertise.
- Double-Blind Review: Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to ensure impartial evaluation.
- Decision Making: Based on reviewers’ feedback, the editor makes a decision: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.
- Revisions and Resubmission: Authors address reviewers’ comments and resubmit revised manuscripts, which may undergo further review if necessary.
- Final Decision: The editor makes the final decision after revisions are accepted.
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Provide objective, evidence-based, and timely feedback.
- Identify potential ethical concerns such as plagiarism, data manipulation, or undisclosed conflicts of interest.
- Maintain confidentiality of the manuscript and not use unpublished data for personal advantage.
- Disclose any conflicts of interest that may bias their review.
Author Responsibilities
- Ensure manuscripts are original, properly cited, and free from plagiarism.
- Respond to reviewers’ comments constructively and within specified deadlines.
- Provide ethical statements, informed consent, and data availability details where applicable.
Editorial Board Responsibilities
- Oversee the peer review process to maintain its fairness and transparency.
- Ensure conflicts of interest are identified and managed.
- Make publication decisions based solely on the scholarly merit of the submission.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers, editors, and staff are prohibited from sharing or discussing manuscript details outside the peer review process.
Turnaround Time
JNPR aims to complete the initial review process within 3–4 weeks. The overall peer review duration may vary depending on revisions and reviewer availability, but the journal prioritizes efficiency while maintaining quality.
Appeals and Complaints
Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by providing a reasoned response. Appeals are independently reviewed by another editor or board member not involved in the initial decision. Complaints regarding the peer review process are handled according to COPE guidelines.
Ethical Oversight
The peer review process is conducted in compliance with ethical standards set by COPE, ICMJE, WAME, and DOAJ. Cases of misconduct are investigated following established best practice frameworks.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many reviewers assess each manuscript?
Typically, two independent reviewers are assigned. In special cases, a third reviewer may be invited.
Can authors suggest reviewers?
Yes. Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the editorial board reserves the right to make the final selection.
Are reviewer comments shared with authors?
Yes. Authors receive anonymized reviewer feedback to help improve their manuscripts.
Can rejected manuscripts be resubmitted?
Resubmission is allowed only if significant changes are made or if invited by the editorial team.