Peer Review Policy

JPPS is a double-blind, peer-reviewed journal. Each manuscript is presented to two reviewers who are experts in the field.
The comments of reviewers are shared with the author(s) for incorporation in the manuscript. The revised manuscript is further evaluated by the respective section editors and finally by the Editor-in-Chief. If accepted, authors are accordingly informed and the manuscripts are kept for publication. In case of rejection, authors are accordingly informed and the manuscripts are archived.

All submissions are initially assessed for suitability by the Deputy Editors. After the initial assessment, submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed by two independent, anonymous experts and the assigned Editor. This handling editor will recommend a decision to the Editor-in-Chief who is the final decision-making authority.

The revised manuscripts may be subject to the same review process as original submissions. The editors reserve the right to approach additional reviewers as needed. Decisions on revised submissions may also be based entirely on the assessments of the Editor-in-Chief and/or the assigned Editor.

All types of Special articles (Review Articles, Case Reports, Commentaries, Book Reviews, Debates, Recent Advances, New Techniques, Adverse Drug Reactions, and Letter to the Editor) are also subject to the double-blind peer review process.

Recommended reviewers are treated as suggestions only and with no guarantee that they will be approached. Authors with grave concerns about potential reviewers should write to the journal to explain why they would like reviewers to be excluded. The journal editors reserve the right to invite excluded reviewers at their discretion.

The author and reviewer should not have any contact without the permission of the journal during the peer review process and before a final decision has been made. The system is designed to blind the reviewer’s name to the author. If the reviewer includes their name in the review, it may be visible to the author.

No person is permitted to take any role in the peer-review of a paper in which they have an interest, defined as follows: fees or grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in, or any close relationship with, an organisation whose interests, financial or otherwise, may be affected by the publication of the paper.

See JPPS Peer Review Guidelines for details on all instructions and ethical considerations.