Peer Review Process

The Journal of Pulmonology and Respiratory Research (JPRR) follows a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, validity, and originality of published research. The process aligns with COPE standards and best practices recommended by ICMJE and other global organizations.

Overview

All submissions undergo an initial editorial screening followed by external peer review. JPRR operates under a double-blind peer review system, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to minimize bias.

Stages of Peer Review

  1. Initial Editorial Screening: Manuscripts are checked for scope, formatting, plagiarism, and ethical compliance.
  2. Assignment of Reviewers: At least two independent experts are invited to review each manuscript.
  3. Review Reports: Reviewers assess novelty, methodology, ethical standards, and relevance.
  4. Editorial Decision: Based on reviewer recommendations, the editor may request revisions, accept, or reject the manuscript.
  5. Revisions: Authors address reviewer comments and resubmit. Revised versions may undergo additional rounds of review.
  6. Final Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final determination on acceptance.

Possible Editorial Decisions

  • Accept: Manuscript is suitable for publication with minor or no changes.
  • Minor Revision: Authors must address limited comments; re-review may not be necessary.
  • Major Revision: Substantial improvements are required; manuscript is re-evaluated by reviewers.
  • Reject: Manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or scope.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Expertise in the subject area.
  • Absence of conflicts of interest.
  • Commitment to confidentiality and ethical review.

Timeframe

JPRR strives for efficiency in peer review:

  • Initial editorial decisions are provided within 2 weeks of submission.
  • Peer reviews are completed within 4–6 weeks.
  • Final decisions, including revisions, are typically communicated within 8–10 weeks of submission.

Ethical Oversight

  • All manuscripts are screened with plagiarism detection software.
  • Editors follow COPE flowcharts in cases of suspected misconduct.
  • Authors must disclose ethical approvals and conflicts of interest.

Appeals Process

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned request. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editor or the editorial board to ensure fairness.

Transparency and Accountability

  • Decisions are documented and traceable.
  • Reviewer contributions are acknowledged, with optional recognition certificates.
  • JPRR may publish peer review histories for selected articles (open peer review) with author and reviewer consent.

FAQs

Is the review process single-blind or double-blind?

JPRR follows a double-blind system, though exceptions may apply for specific article types.

Can authors suggest reviewers?

Yes. Authors may suggest up to three reviewers, but the final decision rests with the editors.

What if a reviewer delays the process?

The editor may reassign the manuscript to another reviewer to avoid unnecessary delays.

Conclusion

The peer review process at JPRR ensures integrity, transparency, and fairness in scholarly publishing. By involving expert reviewers and adhering to international standards, the journal upholds its mission of advancing pulmonary and respiratory science.