The Review Process

 | Post date: 2018/01/19 | 
Review Process
All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review (although these decisions may be based on informal advice from specialists in the field).
Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to two reviewers, but sometimes more if special advice is needed (for example on statistics or a particular technique). The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice, from among several possibilities:
  •  Accept, with or without editorial revisions
  •  Invite the authors to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached
  •  Reject, but indicate to the authors that further work might justify a resubmission
  •  Reject outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.
  • Peer Review Guidelines
    This guide is written to help you peer review manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering. Reading this should answer most of the queries you have and guide you in completing a peer review report in the most thorough and prompt way to ensure the paper is properly reviewed and published quickly. If you have any further queries, please submit them to our Editorial Offices.

    Our philosophy on peer review
    Authors have historically complained of the time it takes to get a paper published UMSHA Press tries hard to process papers as thoroughly, fairly and rapidly as possible. As a result, peer reviewers are asked to submit their comments within 14 business days.
    All manuscripts submitted to UMSHA Press Journals are subject to double-blind peer review. We believe that using anonymous peer reviewers is the best way to get honest opinions on papers. 
    Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering requires that peer reviewers not contact authors directly. You should consider the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.pdf before accepting to review a manuscript and throughout the peer-review process.
    An outline of the manuscript life cycle, from submission to publication, can be viewed here.

    Why is peer review important?
    Peer reviewers’ comments and recommendations are an essential guide to inform the editor’s decision on a manuscript. Peer review ensures that manuscripts receive unbiased critique and expert feedback, allowing authors to improve their manuscript and therefore high-quality scientific research and reviews to be published. It also helps the readers to trust the scientific integrity of the article and to make informed decisions where peer reviewer comments are available.

    Peer Reviewer
    After receiving a request to peer review it is essential that peer reviewers respond in a timely fashion, particularly if they cannot do the review, to avoid unnecessarily delaying the process.
    Peer reviewers should declare any conflicts of interest, and possess sufficient knowledge in the field to perform a thorough assessment of the manuscript.

    Competing Interests.
    Peer reviewers must keep any information regarding the identity of the authors and the content of the manuscript confidential.
    Peer review comments should be objective and constructive without being of a hostile or derogatory nature.
    Further information on ethical peer review issues and conflicts of interest can be found in the COPE guidelines

View: 37448 Time(s)   |   Print: 714 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb