Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The PJG employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, validity, originality, and scientific relevance of all published articles.
Initial Editorial Assessment
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the Editorial Office and the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor. During this stage, manuscripts are evaluated for:
- Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal
- Compliance with the journal's submission requirements
- Scientific quality and methodological soundness
- Ethical and regulatory compliance
- Originality and potential contribution to the field
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision prior to peer review or may be rejected without external review.
External Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are assigned to an Editor who oversees the peer review process. At least two independent experts in the relevant field are invited to review the manuscript.
Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest. Invitations are managed through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Invited reviewers receive the manuscript title and abstract and are asked to confirm their availability to conduct the review. At a minimum, two (2) reviews would be done for each manuscript. A third reviewer may be engaged by the Editorial Staff in case there is discordance between the two reviews and/or another review is required to help arrive at an editorial decision regarding further comments from the authors.
The journal follows a double-blind review process, wherein the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations, which may include: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
