PEER REVIEW POLICY
Peer Review Policy
The double-blind review process of peer review which is a fundamental scientific publication process is adopted by the foundation university journal of rehabilitation science. FUJRS conducts an internal peer review of the submitted manuscripts to evaluate the originality of the manuscript, scope, content, etc. Manuscripts found unsuitable for publication with reference to poor structure, writing, or topics are rejected at this initial stage of peer review. Manuscripts that require any revision after internal review are returned for required amendments. Manuscripts found suitable following internal review/revision by the editor assigned are forwarded for at least two external reviews. The only exception to this process is invited editorials or the editorials and obituaries authored by the editor in chief and letter to editors. The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It is recommended that reviewers should not be retained or copy manuscripts sent for review. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor. Reviewers and editors must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors' specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the art. Manuscripts are reviewed by two independent experts in the relevant area. The reviewers make a scientific assessment and a recommendation to the editors. Reviewers remain unknown to the authors. The Handling editor considers the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments before making a final decision either to accept, accept with revision, return for revision, or to reject a manuscript.
The identities of both reviewers and authors are concealed from each other throughout the review. To facilitate this, authors must ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in such a way that they do not reveal their identities to reviewers, either directly or indirectly. Please, therefore, ensure that the following items are not present in your manuscript and are provided as a separate file with the title of “Title Page”. It should include:
- The manuscript title
- Article category, abstract word count, manuscript word count
- All authors' names and affiliations
- A complete address for the corresponding author, including an e-mail address
The title page will remain separate from the manuscript file throughout the peer review process and will not be sent to the reviewers. Please remove any identifying information, such as authors' names or affiliations, from your manuscript before submission. Reviewer Blinding is further ensured by the editor assigned by reviewing the manuscript file for any author identification markers and removing them from document and document properties. Author anonymity prevents any reviewer bias, for example, based on an author’s country of origin or previous controversial work. Please be advised that even with extensive efforts it is still possible that reviewers might identify the author through their writing style, subject matter, or self-citation. The author is blinded of the reviewer by removing any identification markers from the manuscript file returned by the reviewer with the reviewer’s comments by the assigned editor before sending the file to the authors for revisions. Additionally, reviewer performa given to reviewers is not forwarded to authors and any comments specified in reviewer performa are provided to authors in the revision request email under the heading of reviewers comments.
Unless otherwise specified, FUJRS expects editors and reviewers to handle all submissions in confidence. If a reviewer wishes to delegate the review or seek the opinion of a colleague on a specific aspect of the paper, they are expected to clear this with the editor in the first instance.
Reviewers/referees' conflict of interest:
Editors consider and try to avoid any potential conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers. The journal includes wording in their invitation to review stating that acceptance of the invitation implies no competing interest. Where a reviewer declares a potential conflict of interest the editor will select alternative reviewers. Failure to declare a conflict of interest may result in the removal of the reviewer from the journal database.