When you publish, edit, or peer review with IPRPD, you become part of a community that will support you and enable you to share research with a relevant global audience. This way, together, we maximize the impact, reach & visibility of your research. The report should comprehensively critique the submission and consist of much more than a few brief sentences. IPRPD does not require a specific structure for reports, however, a suggested format is:
2. Major issues
3. Minor issues
We encourage reviewers to help authors improve their manuscript. The report should give constructive analysis to authors, particularly where revisions are recommended. Where reviewers do not wish authors to see certain comments, these can be added to the confidential comments to the Editor in Chief.
To help authors receive timely reviews, reviewer reports should be submitted via mailing to [email protected] on or before the agreed deadline. Reviewers should contact IPRPD if they are unable to meet the deadline so an alternative date can be arranged.
We encourage reviewers to focus their reports on objectively critiquing the several aspects of the submission, including the soundness of the methodology and whether the conclusions can be supported by the results. Comments may also be given on novelty and the potential impact of the work. At the end of their review, we ask reviewers to recommend one of the following actions:
1. Publish Unaltered
2. Consider after Minor Changes
3. Consider after Major Changes
4. Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel
S.N: Overall decision will be made by the Editor- in- Chief.