Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

At Health and Professional Leadership, peer review is a vital component of our editorial process, ensuring that only high-quality, original, and impactful research is published. We employ a rigorous double-blind peer review system, in which manuscripts are evaluated by independent external reviewers—recognized experts in their fields—who are unaware of the authors’ identities and unaffiliated with one another. 

These reviewers assist the Editorial Committee by critically and constructively assessing the manuscript’s originality, scientific merit, relevance to the journal’s scope, and adherence to formal and ethical standards. Our international reviewer pool includes specialists with doctoral degrees or recognized expertise, prioritizing those with publications indexed in Web of Science and Scopus. 

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential, and reviewers are strictly prohibited from sharing, discussing, or using the content for personal or third-party benefit. If consultation with another expert is necessary, the Editorial Committee will inform the authors accordingly.

 

Steps and times of the review process:

 Submission Acknowledgment: Upon submission, the journal sends a confirmation email with a unique reference number for the manuscript.

Initial Editorial Review: The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor reviews the manuscript to assess its fit with the journal’s scope, completeness, clarity of findings, and originality.

Early Rejection Notification: If the manuscript is rejected at this stage (e.g., due to scope mismatch, incompleteness, insufficient detail, or plagiarism), the author will be notified within 72 hours.

 Double-Blind Peer Review: Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent for double-blind peer review. Authors typically receive an initial decision within 30–45 days.

Revision Process: If revisions are required, the editor and reviewers’ comments, along with the original manuscript, will be sent to the author. Revised manuscripts and responses must be submitted within 15 days.

Acceptance and Publication: Once accepted, the article will be published online within approximately 15 days, assigned a DOI, and submitted to relevant indexing databases by the editorial team.

 

Stages and times of the review process:

All interactions between reviewers and the editorial team are conducted through the journal’s web portal to ensure a complete digital record of the review process and maintain full traceability. Upon receiving an editorial invitation via email, reviewers have up to 7 days to accept or decline the review request. The invitation includes the manuscript’s title, abstract, and the proposed review timeline. Access to the full manuscript and the review form is granted only after the reviewer accepts the invitation.

Reviewers are expected to submit their evaluation and recommendation within 28 days of accepting the assignment. In addition to completing the review form, reviewers may upload a separate document containing detailed comments or notes. The final recommendation must align with the reviewer’s qualitative assessment and, if applicable, the numerical score provided.

If there is a significant discrepancy between the two reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial team will seek a third independent review. Should a second round of peer review be necessary, it will be conducted by the same reviewers who participated in the initial evaluation.