For Reviewer

Role of Peer Review and Editorial Procedure

All submissions to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript’s scientific rigor, originality, and relevance to rehabilitation practice and research. Reviewers are requested to submit their reports within the designated timeframe (typically 2–4 weeks).

Reviewers should:

  • Have no conflicts of interest with any of the authors or their affiliated institutions
  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and avoid personal criticism or biased remarks
  • Maintain strict confidentiality and not share or use unpublished data for personal research
  • Communicate any suspected research or publication misconduct to the Editorial Office

Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

  • Originality: Does the research contribute new insights to rehabilitation science?
  • Scientific Rigor: Are the methods, analyses, and data presentation appropriate and valid?
  • Ethical Standards: Has ethical approval been obtained where necessary?
  • Statistical Validity: Are analyses and error measures clearly described?
  • Conclusions: Are conclusions supported by the presented data?
  • References: Are citations relevant and adequate, without unnecessary self-citations?
  • Clarity and Presentation: Is the manuscript well-structured and clearly written?
  • Language and Tone: Is the writing professional and free from inappropriate or discriminatory language?
  • Sex and Gender Reporting: Where applicable, do authors follow the SAGER Guidelines?

Reviewing Standards by Article Type

* All citations must be in Vancouver referencing style. For in-text, Reference will be cited in the Superscript.

* References should be updated, and no more than 60% should be from last five years.

Format and Structure of Review Reports

A standardized review report form will be provided by the Pakistan Journal of Rehabilitation. Reviewers are required to complete this form in full and submit it along with their evaluation and recommendation. Each review report should include:

  • Major Comments: Highlight substantial conceptual or methodological issues.
  • Minor Comments: Suggest improvements in clarity, structure, or references.
  • Recommendation: Choose one — Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or

Feedback must be constructive, specific, and evidence-based.

Ethical Concerns and Misconduct

  • If reviewers suspect plagiarism, data fabrication, unethical research practices, or image manipulation, they must immediately notify the Editorial Office. PJR follows COPE guidelines for the investigation and resolution of ethical issues.
  • If reviewer seeks assistance from anyone during the review process, it must be acknowledged and reported to the editor.
  • Reviewers are not permitted to upload manuscript to any software platform. The use of AI tools for conducting reviews is discouraged.

Acknowledgement
The Pakistan Journal of Rehabilitation extends its sincere appreciation to all reviewers for their time, expertise, and dedication to advancing evidence-based rehabilitation research. The journal acknowledges their valuable contributions through the issuance of a Certificate of Acknowledgement.

Contact Information

Editorial Office

Pakistan Journal of Rehabilitation

Email: [email protected]

Website: https://pjr.zu.edu.pk/