Peer-review
Peer-review policy
The peer-review policy of BJOA is designed to ensure the quality, integrity, and validity of the research published in the journal. Here are the key points of our peer-review process:
Double-Blind Review: BJOA follows a double-blind peer-review process, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. This helps to maintain impartiality and fairness in the evaluation process.
Expert Reviewers: Manuscripts submitted to BJOA are assigned to reviewers who possess expertise in the relevant field. We strive to select reviewers with a strong research background and a track record of publication in related areas.
Rigorous Evaluation: Reviewers are instructed to evaluate the submitted manuscripts based on their scientific merit, originality, significance, methodology, and adherence to ethical guidelines. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations to help authors improve their work.
Timely Review Process: We aim to conduct the review process efficiently and promptly. Reviewers are given a reasonable timeline to evaluate the manuscript and provide their feedback. We prioritize timely communication with authors regarding the progress of their submissions.
Author-Reviewer Communication: If reviewers have queries or require additional information, they can communicate directly with the corresponding author through the journal's submission system. This helps to clarify any concerns and ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the manuscript.
Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers' comments and recommendations, the editor-in-chief or the handling editor makes an informed decision on the manuscript. The possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. Authors are provided with detailed feedback and suggestions to address the reviewers' comments.
Confidentiality and Ethical Considerations: Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality regarding the manuscripts they review. They are required to disclose any conflicts of interest that may compromise their impartiality. Editors ensure that the peer-review process adheres to ethical guidelines and protects the rights and integrity of the authors and reviewers.
Reviewers' eligibility
At BOAJ, we have specific eligibility criteria for individuals interested in becoming reviewers for our journal. The following are the key criteria we consider for reviewer selection:
Expertise: Reviewers should have expertise in the specific field or discipline related to the manuscript they will review. They should possess in-depth knowledge, experience, and understanding of the subject matter to provide insightful and constructive feedback.
Qualifications: Reviewers should hold a doctoral degree (Ph.D., MD, or equivalent) or have extensive research experience in their respective fields. This ensures that they have the necessary academic qualifications and expertise to evaluate the scientific content of the manuscripts.
Publication Record: Reviewers with a strong publication record in reputable scientific journals are preferred. Their track record of scholarly contributions demonstrates their knowledge, expertise, and ability to critically evaluate scientific research.
Review Experience: Prior experience in reviewing manuscripts for other journals is valuable. Reviewers who have previously served as reviewers can bring their experience and familiarity with the peer-review process to provide thorough and constructive evaluations.
Current Research Engagement: Reviewers should be actively engaged in research in their respective fields to stay updated with the latest advancements and emerging trends. This ensures their ability to evaluate manuscripts within the current scientific context.
Professional Conduct: Reviewers are expected to adhere to ethical guidelines and maintain the confidentiality of the reviewed manuscripts. They should provide unbiased, constructive, and timely feedback and avoid conflicts of interest that could compromise the integrity of the review process.
Communication Skills: Effective communication is crucial for reviewers to convey their evaluations and recommendations clearly and constructively. Reviewers should possess strong written communication skills to provide detailed feedback and suggestions to authors.
Peer-review ethical conduct
BOAJ upholds high standards of ethical conduct in the peer-review process. We expect all reviewers to adhere to the following ethics guidelines:
Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not discuss the manuscripts or their contents with others, except as authorized by the editor.
Impartiality and Objectivity: Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively, based on their scientific merit and without personal bias. They should provide fair and constructive feedback that helps improve the quality of the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise their impartiality. If a reviewer feels they have a conflict of interest with a particular manuscript, they should inform the editor promptly to be recused from the review process.
Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to provide their evaluations within the agreed-upon timeline. If reviewers anticipate any delays, they should notify the editor promptly to make alternative arrangements.
Transparency and Disclosure: Reviewers should disclose any significant financial or personal relationships that could influence their assessment of the manuscript. They should not use unpublished information from the reviewed manuscript for personal gain.
Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, detailed, and constructive feedback to help authors improve their work. Feedback should be respectful and aimed at enhancing the quality and impact of the manuscript.
Appropriate Language and Tone: Reviewers should maintain a professional and respectful tone in their comments, avoiding any derogatory or offensive language.
Acknowledgment of Limitations: Reviewers should recognize the limitations of their own expertise and not hesitate to seek assistance from the editor if required.
Responsiveness to Editor's Queries: Reviewers should promptly respond to any queries or clarifications sought by the editor during the review process.
Avoidance of Plagiarism: Reviewers should be vigilant in identifying any potential plagiarism or ethical concerns in the manuscript and report them to the editor.
How to become a reviewer
BJOA editorial board will invite researchers with the appropriate expertise and qualifications to ensure the highest quality of peer review for the articles submitted to our journal. Researchers interested in service as a reviewer can directly contact to BJOA Editor-in-Chief.
