Peer Review Policy

The Pakistan Journal of Healthcare Research (PJHR) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and relevance of all research published in the journal. The peer review process is designed to evaluate the scientific quality, originality, and contribution of submitted manuscripts to the field of healthcare research. Below is the journal's peer review policy:

1. Peer Review Process

  • Double-Blind Review: PJHR employs a double-blind peer review process. Both the identities of the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. This approach ensures objectivity and impartiality in the evaluation of the manuscript.
  • Reviewer Selection: Manuscripts are sent to two or more independent, qualified peer reviewers who have expertise in the subject matter of the submission. Reviewers are selected based on their academic background, professional experience, and ability to provide constructive and critical feedback.
  • Initial Assessment: Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript meets the journal's scope and basic quality standards. If it does not, the manuscript is returned to the author with feedback.

2. Criteria for Peer Review

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on several criteria, including but not limited to:

  • Originality and novelty of the research
  • Scientific rigor and methodology
  • Clarity and quality of writing
  • Relevance and significance to the field of healthcare research
  • Ethical considerations (including approval from ethical committees and informed consent, where applicable)
  • Accuracy of citations and referencing
  • Overall contribution to advancing healthcare research

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide an unbiased and constructive critique of the manuscript.
  • Ensure that all comments and suggestions are clearly explained to aid the authors in improving their manuscript.
  • Refrain from reviewing any manuscripts where there is a potential conflict of interest (e.g., competing interests with the authors).
  • Maintain confidentiality and avoid disclosing any information about the manuscript to third parties.

4. Editorial Decision

Based on the feedback from the reviewers, the editorial team will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted without revision or with minor revisions.
  • Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript requires major revisions, and the authors are asked to address the reviewers’ comments before resubmitting.
  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the required standards for publication and is therefore rejected.

The authors will receive detailed feedback from the reviewers, which will be provided anonymously (unless otherwise requested by the reviewers). Authors are given the opportunity to revise their manuscripts and resubmit them for further evaluation.

5. Timeframe for Peer Review

  • The peer review process typically takes 4 to 6 weeks, depending on the availability of reviewers and the complexity of the manuscript.
  • Authors are notified at each stage of the review process, including when reviewers are assigned, when feedback is provided, and when the editorial decision is made.

6. Ethical Considerations in Peer Review

  • PJHR adheres to ethical guidelines to ensure fairness and transparency in the peer review process. Any instances of plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical research practices discovered during the review process will result in immediate rejection of the manuscript and may lead to reporting the issue to the relevant authorities.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that might affect their objectivity in the peer review process. Manuscripts from authors with conflicts of interest are handled with extra care to ensure impartiality.

7. Transparency

  • The names of reviewers are not disclosed to authors under the double-blind review process. However, after the review process is completed and the manuscript is published, authors may opt to acknowledge the contributions of reviewers publicly (if the reviewers consent).

8. Open Peer Review Option

  • PJHR offers an optional open peer review process, where both the reviewer’s identity and the review comments are published alongside the article. This approach is voluntary and requires prior consent from both authors and reviewers.

9. Post-Publication Review

  • After publication, the journal encourages post-publication commentary and peer reviews. Authors may engage with the academic community in the form of responses to these comments or letters to the editor. These interactions ensure continuous dialogue and improvement of published research.

By adhering to this peer review policy, the Pakistan Journal of Healthcare Research ensures that all research published is of the highest scientific quality and contributes meaningfully to the field of healthcare.