Reviewer Guidelines
Clear guidance for reviewers supporting high quality molecular research in JPGR.
Reviewer Essentials
- Assess rigor, data quality, and relevance
- Provide constructive feedback
- Maintain confidentiality
- Disclose conflicts of interest
Journal at a Glance
ISSN: 2326-0793
DOI Prefix: 10.14302/issn.2326-0793
License: CC BY 4.0
Peer reviewed open access journal
Scope Alignment
Proteome profiling, genomic discovery, multi-omics integration, biomarker validation, computational proteomics, and translational molecular medicine. We emphasize reproducible pipelines and clinically meaningful evidence.
Publishing Model
Open access, single blind peer review, and rapid online publication after acceptance and production checks. Metadata validation and DOI registration are included.
Reviewer Expectations
Reviewers evaluate scientific rigor, data integrity, and relevance to proteomics or genomics. Reviews should be constructive, specific, and focused on helping authors improve their work.
JPGR values reviews that identify strengths, highlight limitations, and provide actionable recommendations.
Evaluation Criteria
- Clarity of research question and hypothesis
- Appropriateness of experimental design and methods
- Data quality, statistical analysis, and reproducibility
- Biological interpretation and clinical relevance
- Compliance with ethics and data sharing requirements
Confidentiality and Ethics
Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential and disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment. If a conflict exists, decline the review promptly.
Do not use unpublished data for personal research or share content outside the review process.
Review Structure
Provide a summary of strengths, note major concerns, and list minor comments. Cite specific sections or data points to guide revisions.
Where possible, suggest improvements for data reporting and clarity of figures.
Recommendation Guidance
- Accept when methods and data fully support conclusions
- Minor revision for clarity or additional context
- Major revision when key analyses or validations are missing
- Reject when scope fit is poor or evidence is insufficient
- Refer to editorial policies when uncertainty exists
Timeframes and Reminders
JPGR aims for timely review cycles. Reviewers are encouraged to confirm availability promptly and submit reviews within the requested period.
If more time is needed, contact the editorial office so expectations can be adjusted.
Timely reviews help maintain predictable decision timelines for authors.
Clear timelines also support special issue coordination.
Reviewer Guidance FAQ
How long should a review take?
Most reviews are completed within 14 to 21 days depending on complexity.
Should I comment on language issues?
Yes. Note clarity issues, but focus primarily on scientific rigor and data integrity.
Can I suggest additional analyses?
Yes, when they strengthen conclusions without overextending the study scope.
What if I cannot complete the review?
Notify the editorial office immediately so another reviewer can be assigned.
JPGR Commitment
JPGR is committed to rigorous, transparent publishing in proteomics and genomics. We emphasize reproducible methods, complete data statements, and ethical compliance across all article types.
The editorial office supports authors, editors, and reviewers with clear guidance and responsive communication. For questions about scope or workflow, contact [email protected].
We encourage continuous improvement in reporting practices and share updates that help the community maintain high standards in molecular publishing.
