Guidance for JNPP Editors
Editors play a central role in protecting scientific quality and fairness. These guidelines summarize expectations for editorial evaluation, reviewer selection, and decision making. Timely decisions support author confidence and maintain journal credibility across clinical neuroscience and physiology.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors ensure that each manuscript receives expert, impartial review aligned with JNPP standards.
Quality and Scope Assessment
Confirm that the manuscript fits the journal scope and meets methodological standards. Identify major limitations or ethical concerns early to prevent avoidable review delays.
Reviewer Selection and Oversight
Choose reviewers with subject expertise and no conflicts. Monitor review quality, request clarifications when needed, and ensure that recommendations are evidence based.
Ethics, Confidentiality, and Communication
Editors are guardians of integrity and must handle all submissions with confidentiality and fairness.
Conflicts of Interest and Ethics
Editors should disclose conflicts and recuse themselves when impartiality could be compromised. Ethical concerns, including consent, data integrity, or patient safety, must be escalated promptly.
Author Communication Standards
Decision letters should be clear, respectful, and actionable. Provide concise summaries of reviewer concerns and explain the rationale for editorial decisions.
Decision Workflow
Follow a consistent process to maintain fairness and transparency.
Initial Editorial Review
Assess completeness, ethics compliance, and fit with the Special Issue or journal scope. Decline submissions that do not meet baseline standards.
Manage Peer Review
Invite qualified reviewers, monitor timelines, and provide guidance for constructive feedback. Replace reviewers who cannot deliver timely evaluations.
Issue an Evidence Based Decision
Decisions should reflect reviewer input, data quality, and ethical compliance. Clearly explain required revisions and major concerns to authors.
Editor FAQ
Quick answers to common editorial questions.
What if reviewers disagree strongly?
How should delays be handled?
When is a desk decision appropriate?
Support Editorial Excellence
If you have questions about editorial policy or need reviewer guidance, contact the editorial office. We support editors with timely resources and procedural clarity. Clear decisions protect author trust.
