International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation

Home Aim & Scope Editorial Board Archives Articles Author instructions Online Submission Contact Us

Peer Review Policy

International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation follows a double peer review system in which at least two professional peer reviewers will do the review process.

All submissions to our journals are first reviewed for completeness and then taken into consideration for the editorial assessment who will determine whether or not they're appropriate for peer review. Where an editor is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript, another member of the editorial Board will be assigned to oversee peer review.

Editors will take into consideration the peer-reviewed report whilst making a decision, but are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. An issue if raised by a single peer reviewer or the editor themself will result in the manuscript being rejected. Authors receive peer review reports with the editorial decision on their manuscript

International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation - the peer review process.

1. Initial Processing by Editorial Assistant

The Editorial Assistant will carry out quality checks of the submitted manuscript and at that time you are requested to provide further information before your article is sent for the Peer Review process.

2. Editor Assignment evaluation:

When the selected manuscript has passed initial quality checks by the Editorial Assistant, it will be assigned to an appropriate Associate Editor who will evaluate the manuscript for scope, quality, and fit for the journal. The manuscript that does not meet these criteria will be rejected.

3. Awaiting Reviewer Selection

When the selected article meets the Journal’s scope and has been approved for peer review, the Editorial Team will find an external expert reviewer who are available to review and the article will be sent to relevant Journal Editors for internal review. For most articles, a minimum of two reviews are required. Articles maybe be sent to multiple prospective reviewers before the required number is secured.

4. Peer Review in Progress

Peer reviewers are usually given 2 weeks to submit their review of the article. If at all the reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will begin the reviewer selection process again or reassign a reviewer for the particular article.

5. Editor Decision in progress

When the article has received the minimum number of reviewers required to make a decision, the Editor will take into account the expert reviewers’ opinions to make an informed decision of accept, reject or revise. When the article is accepted for the publishing it will go in the next stage of production wherein the details will be mentioned to the respective authors. If the respective article is rejected then the concerned author will be informed regarding the same.

6. In Production

When the article has been accepted, the respective corresponding author will receive an email to confirm and the article will move through the final quality checks and into Production where it will be processed for publication and will be emailed by the Production Editor with a timeline and be provided with a link to a platform called In Production where you can continue to track your article’s progress.

TIME PERIOD

While the goal is completing the peer review process as quickly as possible, kindly bear in mind that the reviewers give their time voluntarily and there may be occasions where several reviewers have to be invited before the required number can be arranged, or when a reviewer fails to deliver a review and the process has to start over again. The average time to make the first decision is usually a week.