Review Policy

1. Criteria for Publication

All manuscripts submitted to JIRAP are subject to a rigorous peer-review process. This includes Research Articles, Reviews, Short Communications, Reports, and Case Studies. To be considered for publication, submissions must meet the following criteria:

  • Originality:The work must be novel, not previously published, and not under consideration by any other journal. If findings have been presented at a conference (as an abstract or poster), this must be declared at the time of submission.
  • Scientific Rigor:For research articles, the study design, methodology, experimental procedures, and statistical analyses must be sound, clearly explained, and replicable. Sufficient detail must be provided to allow for critical appraisal.
  • Clarity and Accessibility:JIRAP encourages the use of clear, concise, and accessible language to ensure the research is understandable to our interdisciplinary readership, which includes professionals from various allied health and pharmacy fields.

2. Peer Review Model

JIRAP employs a double-blind peer-review model. This means the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors. This process is designed to ensure impartiality and minimize bias.

  • Author Responsibilities:To maintain the integrity of the blind review, authors must make every effort to remove identifying information from the main manuscript file. Acknowledgments and personal details should be included only in the separate cover letter.
  • Conflict of Interest:All authors and reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission or invitation to review.

3. The Review Process

The review process is managed as follows:

  1. Initial Editorial Screening:Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial check by the editorial staff for scope, formatting, and adherence to journal policies. The Editor-in-Chief or a Managing Editor then assesses the manuscript for its overall fit, originality, and scientific soundness.
  2. Desk Decision:Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic criteria may be rejected without external peer review (desk rejection). Authors may receive feedback on the reasons for this decision.
  3. Formal Peer Review:Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are typically sent to a minimum of two or three independent expert reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the manuscript's specific field and their proven record of providing thorough, constructive critiques.
  4. Editorial Decision:The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on the reviewers' recommendations, the manuscript's priority for the journal's scope, and its potential interest to the readership. Decisions fall into several categories:
    • Accept(with or without minor revisions)
    • Minor or Major Revisions Required(The manuscript requires specific changes and a point-by-point response to reviewers' comments before a final decision can be made.)
    • Reject(typically on grounds of insufficient novelty, major methodological flaws, or being out of scope)

4. Responsibilities of the Peer Reviewers

Reviewers are core to the integrity of our scholarly process. Their responsibilities include:

  • Confidentiality:Reviewers must treat the manuscript as a confidential document and not share or discuss its content with anyone without explicit permission from the editor.
  • Expertise and Constructiveness:Provide objective, detailed, and constructive feedback to help the authors improve their work. Critiques should be supported by evidence and references where appropriate.
  • Scope of Assessment:Evaluate the manuscript on:
    • Technical Soundness:Study design, methodology, statistical analysis, and interpretation of results.
    • Originality and Significance:The novelty of the work and its contribution to the interdisciplinary fields of allied health and pharmacy.
    • Scholarly Context:How the work relates to and advances the existing literature.
    • Presentation:The clarity of writing, the logical flow of arguments, and the accuracy and relevance of references, figures, and tables.
  • Timeliness:Submit the review within the stipulated timeframe. Reviewers who anticipate a delay must notify the editorial office promptly.

5. Policy for Submissions from Editors, Editorial Board Members, or Journal Staff

To ensure absolute impartiality, submissions from JIRAP's Editors, Editorial Board Members, or journal staff are handled with strict protocols to eliminate any conflict of interest. The handling editor will be completely excluded from the decision-making process. The manuscript will be assigned to an independent Associate Editor, who will manage the entire peer-review process anonymously, securing reviews from independent experts before making a recommendation.