PEER REVIEW PROCESS
All manuscripts will be subject to editorial review and double-blind peer reviews. The Journal editor does not reveal the reviewer's credentials to the authors and vice-versa. So, both parties are not aware of each other's identity. All indicators of identity such as names, affiliations, etc are removed. Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by one to two experts who will be asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, whether it duplicates already published work, and whether or not the manuscript is sufficiently clear for publication. Reviewers will also be asked to indicate how interesting and significant the research is. The Editors will reach a decision based on these reports and, where necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board.
The authors should carefully examine sentence structure, completeness, and the accuracy of the text, references, tables, and graphic contents of the revised manuscript. Manuscripts with excessive errors in any aspect, i.e., spelling or punctuation, will be returned to authors for revision before resubmission or may be rejected entirely. Reject the article outright, typically on grounds of lack of originality, insufficient conceptual advancements, or major technical and or interpretational problems. Any changes made to the original manuscript will be clearly stated for the authors to review.
The Editor-in-Chief will have the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
In the final stage, the editorial board has the right to edit articles related to aspects of style, format, and clarity according to the JoPHIN: Journal of Public Health and Industrial Nutrition.
The time to reach a final decision depends on the number of reviews rotation, perceptive writer, etc. Typically, the time frame of delivery by an average of 2-3 months a final decision.