Peer Review Policy
Last updated 1/4/2025
The Review Process
The Infectious Diseases Journal of Pakistan maintains a clear and thorough peer review system to guarantee transparent, fair, and objective assessment of submitted manuscripts. The journal adheres to a double-blind review process.
Guidelines: The chosen manuscript first undergoes evaluation by two external reviewers, who are experts in the relevant field as determined by the editors. Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editorial team then decides among the available options.
- Accept after editorial revisions--inviting the authors to revise their manuscripts and 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 lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.
Reviewers are encouraged to suggest specific actions, but editors may sometimes need to resolve conflicting recommendations. Decisions are not based solely on majority opinions or numerical ratings—instead, editors weigh the strength of each reviewer’s and the authors’ arguments while maintaining confidentiality. Reviewers’ critiques, especially technical ones, are given serious consideration. If a single reviewer opposes publication, other reviewers may be asked whether the objection is overly strict. In rare cases where further input is needed—such as on a specialized technical matter—additional reviewers might be consulted, though this is avoided unless necessary. Detailed versions of these guidelines are provided to both authors and reviewers.
Selection of Reviewer: Reviewers are assigned to papers based on their expertise, using our regularly updated database.
Reviewer Report:
Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript's originality, methodological rigor, adherence to ethical standards, clarity of results, and whether the conclusions are well-supported. They should also check if the references are pertinent to the research. While language editing is not a requirement of peer review, reviewers may optionally suggest improvements. Additionally, they should point out any significant uncited literature and provide citations for contradictory findings or arguments. Reviewers must decline to evaluate manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest due to professional or institutional ties.
Duration of Review Process: The duration of the initial review stage depends on how quickly the reviewers respond. Reviewers are expected to complete their manuscript evaluations within the set timeframe (typically 4–6 weeks) and acknowledge any follow-up reminders. Once the editor reaches a decision, the author receives the manuscript along with the reviewers' feedback, often including their direct comments. The revised version then undergoes further rounds of review until it meets the required standards, leading to a final decision.
Rewarding Reviewers: A thank-you email is sent once the review is finished via the online review system.
Editor’s Decision is Final: Reviewers provide recommendations to the editor, who makes the ultimate decision on whether to approve or decline the article.
Continuous Improvement:
The Infectious Diseases Journal of Pakistan (Infect Dis J Pak) is dedicated to refining its peer review system through ongoing enhancements. The journal actively collects and evaluates feedback from authors, reviewers, and editorial board members to improve the clarity and efficiency of its peer review process.
This detailed Peer Review Policy highlights the essential steps, core principles, and ethical guidelines that govern the journal’s peer review system, with a strong focus on fairness, openness, and sustained progress.
