Like other prestigious research journals, the Pakistan Journal of Rehabilitation has established its review policy to promote authenticity and quality in the published articles. PJR offers a double-blind peer review policy for all types of publications submitted to PJR to preserve the anonymity of both the author and reviewer throughout the consideration process. The editorial officers are responsible for keeping their manuscript identity confidential for double-blind peer review; details that may reveal the author’s identity must be removed and kept unknown between the author and the reviewer.

All sorts of comments or feedback regarding manuscripts by the reviewer and the feedback response by the author to the comments are saved and concealed within the cover letter to keep confidentiality intact. It is recommended that authors acknowledge all contributors, but to maintain confidentiality, the details must only be revealed within the cover letter, and the blind peer review policy must be maintained. The manuscripts submitted in PJR are read by the staff editors exceptionally. Only papers that meet the editorial criteria are sent for formal review, including those by international and national reviewers. In between the reviews, authors are advised to improve based on the first reviewer’s comments and later submit to the second reviewer. Still, the identity is always intact and is not revealed at both ends.

Those manuscripts or research papers that don’t meet the criteria of the guideline on evaluation by the editors will be returned to the author based on insufficient material or irrelevant to the journal’s interest; otherwise, inappropriate content will be forbidden promptly without external review.

The editor is responsible for ensuring privacy and removing the authors’ information before proceeding with the articles to the reviewer to adhere to the double-blind peer review policy. It is also confirmed that each article is reviewed using nondiscriminatory and highly professional methods. Moreover, editors promptly provide the reviewers’ comments to the authors and give them ample time to make changes.

All the abovementioned procedures are maintained and practised through a database, i.e., the Open Journal System (OJS). National and international reviewers are entitled to review each article thoroughly. All the reviewers work under the Open Journal System database, receiving and submitting articles from the Editorial Team.

This journal uses a double-blind review, which means that both the reviewers’ and authors’ identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. We will refer to the (COPE, PDF) guidelines for additional clarification.

Submission Review Process:

  1. A preliminary completeness review is performed on every submission to PJR.
  2. Editors evaluate the suitability of recommendations for peer review.
  3. When editors have conflicting interests, the evaluation is managed by a different editorial board member.

Peer Review Process:

  1. Reviewers from outside the conference, committee members, and programme chairs evaluate the proceedings papers.
  2. The selection of peer reviewers takes prior performance, reputation, expertise, and conflicts of interest into account.
  3. Editors strive to include two or more peer reviewers for primary research manuscripts; however, this number may vary in specialised fields.
  4. An editor may serve as a second reviewer in extraordinary circumstances to guarantee openness and careful evaluation.
  5. Though the editorial team makes the final decision, the authors’ suggestions for reviewers may be considered.

Editor Responsibilities:

  1. Editors independently confirm suggested reviewers’ contact information, preferably using institutional email addresses.
  2. Without peer review, editors may accept manuscripts that do not present original research or are evaluated by a specialist reviewer.
  3. Editorial choices are made in response to detailed peer review comments that satisfy predetermined standards.
  4. The peer review process is transparent when editors sign reviews.

Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality:

  1. Editors’ and peer reviewers’ communications are private and shouldn’t be disclosed to outside parties; potential peer reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest.
  2. Although editors have the last say, PJR lets authors recommend possible reviewers.
  3. Authors are discouraged from recommending current or former colleagues from the same institution.
  4. Verifiable information, such as institutional email addresses and ORCIDs or Scopus IDs, should be provided by the author-recommended reviewers in the cover letter.

Peer reviewer diversity:

PJR is committed to promoting inclusion, equity, and diversity in its peer review procedure. Prioritising diverse representation regarding geographic locations, gender identities, racial/ethnic groups, and other demographics is highly encouraged for editors when inviting peer reviewers.

Peer reviewer misconduct:

Manuscript rejection will result from submitting false or misleading information, including identity theft and the suggestion of bogus peer reviewers. PJR follows the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding misconduct.