PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Submitted manuscripts are screened upon receipt to evaluate its relevancy to the scope of the journal. Submissions that are in line with the scope of the journal will undergo a peer review process. This review process is single-blind, with the authors not being aware of the identity of the reviewers, but reviewers being aware of the identity of the authors. In the process of submission, authors are invited to suggest potential reviewers for their paper (including address and email). Under certain circumstances and upon special request, the APJCP is willing to conduct a double-blind review of a manuscript. When a decision is reached, it is sent to the authors by email, including the comments of the referees. Possible decisions after review are: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, re-submit, and reject.
If upon review the editors are interested in considering the manuscript further after additional work has been completed, authors will be invited to re-submit it to the APJCP within 2 months. The revised manuscript should be accompanied by a detailed reply to reviewers’ comments, and changes performed should be highlighted in the text. Any questions concerning the requested changes/additional work or deadline extension, should be addressed to the Editorial Office by email before submission of the revised paper. Please always include the manuscript number in any correspondence and on any documents. Revised manuscripts may be assessed by the editors or returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation. The editors maintain the option to reject a paper in a second or third round of revision, if the specific concerns have not been addressed or if the paper still does not meet a high enough level of priority.
The APJCP always strive to have a timely review process and shorten the process as much as possible; however, the process may take up to two months.