Reviewer policy statement

The practice of peer review is to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our reviewers therefore play a dynamic role in maintaining the high standards and quality of JPOA and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure.

Policy on plagiarism
JPOA checks plagiarism of submitted papers through software, only 19% of Plagiarism will be acceptable for publication.

Initial manuscript evaluation
Once of our Associate Editor first evaluates manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar, or are outside the objective of JPOA. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.

Type of peer review
JPOA engage single blind review, where the reviewer remains anonymous throughout the process, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

How the Reviewer is selected
Editor of JPOA will assign the reviewers, who are matched to the paper according to their speciality. Our atabase is constantly being updated.

Reviewer reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  •  ethical guidelines
  •  Is results supports the conclusions
  • Significant contribution to Existing Knowledge
  •  Content of the paper is original and timely
  •  Coverage of the subject is complete and well organized
  •  Adequacy of Literature Review
  •  Data are valid and research methods are appropriate
  •  Conclusions are valid and properly
  •  Paper is useful to practitioners
  •  Paper is useful to researchers
  •  Free of sensitive statements advocating special interests, advertising, and government policies and programs
  •  Abstract conveys the meaning of the paper
  •  Written in simple, concise, and effective language
  •  Long-term value as a research reference or as a description of practice
  •  Use of Figures and Tables is appropriate
  •  References Checking

How long does the review process take?

  •  The manuscript will be reviewed within 2 months.
  •  All our reviewers sign a conflict of interest statement. Revised manuscripts are usually
    returned to the initial reviewed within 3 weeks.
  •  Reviewers may request to do one revision of a manuscript at a time.

Final report
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along

Editor in chief’s decision is final
Reviewers advise the editor in chief, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject  the article.

Becoming a Reviewer for JPOA
If you are not currently a reviewer for JPOA but would like to be added to the list of reviewers for this title, please contact the editorial office at JPOA. The benefits of reviewing for JPOA include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual Report in JPOA at General body of POA, if you have reviewed more than 3 manuscripts in the preceding 12 months. You may also be able to cite your work for JPOA as part of your professional development requirements for various
Professional Organizations.

CME accreditation
All reviewed for JPOA are eligible for 3 CME points from POA.

Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, special Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.

Reviewer`s List | 2016-2018