JIEPH conducts a double blind peer review process for all manuscripts cleared for review.
The editors make reasonable efforts to anonymize the identities of authors and reviewers.
The JIEPH peer review process is conducted online through the JIEPH journal management system.
The peer review process and the related materials and correspondence are confidential. Reviewers should seek permission from the Managing Editor and Scientific Editor if they would like to consult other persons on matters arising from the manuscript.
When a manuscript is submitted to JIEPH it is assigned to an editor who checks for compliance with the instructions for authors and language correctness.
The manuscript is then assessed by the Scientific Editor or an assigned Associate Scientific Editor for scientific merit as well as suitability for the journal’s audience and fit for the journal’s scope.
The Scientific Editor or assigned Associate Scientific Editor may then clear the manuscript for review.
The Scientific Editor or assigned Associate Scientific Editor selects and invites reviewers for manuscripts cleared for review.
The Scientific Editor or assigned Associate Scientific Editor invites at least two reviewers per manuscript cleared for review.
Additional reviewers may be invited to review specific aspects of the manuscript at the discretion of the assigned Associate Scientific Editor, Scientific Editor, Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers are given up to fourteen days to respond. A reminder is sent via email after seven days.
When a reviewer accepts an invitation to review, the editors send the reviewer a copy of the manuscript and the review report form along with credentials that the reviewer can use to submit their review to the JIEPH Journal Management System.
The reviewers are allowed a stipulated period to conduct and submit their report and can contact the editorial office for an extension as needed.
Reviewers are asked to provide a detailed technical review as well as one of three recommendations: Accept, Revise or Decline.
The Scientific Editor or assigned Associate Scientific Editor reads the review reports and makes a recommendation to the Managing Editor on whether the manuscript should be rejected or revised.
The Managing Editor may recommend that the review reports be sent to the authors and ask for the manuscript to be revised.
The Scientific Editor or assigned Associate Scientific Editor’s recommendation, the review reports and the revised version of the manuscript are presented to the Editor-in-Chief or Acting Editor-in-Chief who decides whether the manuscript can be published in the journal.
In the event reviewers present the editors with conflicting recommendations, the assistance of members of the Editorial Board may be requested at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief or Acting Editor-in-Chief.
A manuscript may be subjected to additional review at the discretion of the Managing Editor, Editor-in-Chief or Acting Editor-in-Chief.
The Editor-in-Chief or Acting Editor-in-Chief’s decision will be communicated to the authors using the details provided during submission.
All appeals should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief or Acting Editor-in-Chief at the following email address: complaints@afenet-journal.net
