Guidelines for Reviewers

 Download the reviewer form

Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Care and Human Occupation are evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers. We use a double-blind peer review model, ensuring anonymity for both authors and reviewers. The carefully prepared comments provided by reviewers like you are essential for editors when deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript.

Reviewer Selection

At the Journal of Care and Human Occupation, when selecting reviewers we ensure that they meet the following criteria:

  • Have adequate expertise to evaluate the manuscript.
  • Possess relevant academic training, typically holding a doctoral degree.
  • Have experience in the specific subject area of the manuscript.
  • Have no conflicts of interest with the authors.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers who agree to evaluate a manuscript have the responsibility to:

  • Declare any conflicts of interest before beginning the review.
  • Decline a review invitation in a timely manner if unavailable, and, if possible, suggest alternative reviewers.
  • Complete the review and submit the report within the established deadline.
  • Evaluate the manuscript impartially, providing a detailed report with specific comments.
  • Inform the editors of any suspicious conduct requiring further investigation.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of assigned manuscripts.

To ensure an efficient peer review process and a smooth editorial workflow, we appreciate reviewers taking a few minutes to read the following guidelines.

We strictly follow the standards established by COPE to guarantee ethical and fully transparent academic publication. Accordingly, we expect reviewers who participate in the evaluation process to comply with the corresponding ethical principles. We strongly recommend consulting the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers when reviewing manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Care and Human Occupation.

Timely communication between the journal and reviewers is crucial to ensure a consistent, fair, and prompt review of manuscripts. We expect reviewer candidates to:

  • Accept or decline a review invitation promptly.
  • Submit their review within the proposed deadline.
  • Suggest relevant alternative reviewers if they are unable to complete the review.

Timeliness of Response

Timely communication between the Journal of Care and Human Occupation and its reviewers is essential to ensure an objective, fair, and deadline-compliant review. Prospective reviewers are expected to:

  • Accept or decline a manuscript review invitation promptly, based on the provided title and abstract.
  • Submit their review within the agreed timeframe. If they cannot meet this deadline or require an extension, they must notify the journal as soon as possible.
  • If unable to complete the review, they are encouraged to suggest, when possible, other reviewers with appropriate expertise.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

It is essential that reviewers provide impartial and transparent feedback. Before starting the review, reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript. These may be personal, professional, financial, political, or ideological in nature. If unsure about whether a conflict exists that might affect impartiality, the reviewer must inform the journal and request guidance.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the peer review process. No part of the manuscript may be used or shared, in whole or in part, before the article’s official publication. Likewise, reviewers must ensure that their identity is not revealed to the authors at any time.

Each reviewer must prepare their own report and must not impersonate another person during the review process. If a reviewer wishes to involve another individual in the review, prior authorization must be obtained from the journal’s editorial office. The names of any collaborators involved in the review must be mentioned at the end of the review report.

Suspicions of Inappropriate Ethical Conduct

If reviewers suspect any type of research misconduct (e.g., evident similarities with previous work or with other manuscripts submitted simultaneously), they must notify the editorial office so the case can be investigated. Any ethical concerns should be communicated directly to the journal via email: rcoh@unipamplona.edu.co

 

Rigorous Evaluation for Reviewers

To ensure a detailed and fair assessment of manuscripts, reviewers are asked to complete an evaluation form addressing the following key aspects:

  1. Authenticity and Originality: The results presented must be the authors’ original contribution, without plagiarism or data manipulation. Novel ideas, approaches, or findings are valued.

  2. Relevance and Impact: The manuscript must address issues of interest and relevance to the academic community in the social sciences field, contributing to the advancement of knowledge.

  3. Scientific Rigor: The methodological design and study execution must align with best scientific practices. Conclusions must be well supported by solid evidence, and the methodology must be clear and reproducible.

  4. Research Ethics: The study must have been conducted in accordance with ethical principles, especially when involving human subjects, animals, or any other type of sensitive research.

  5. Language Quality: The manuscript must be written clearly and precisely, free of grammatical and spelling errors, ensuring effective communication.

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive feedback that contributes to improving the quality and relevance of manuscripts. Editorial decisions will be made after carefully considering all reviewer comments, ensuring a fair and transparent process.