Phys Act Nutr Search

CLOSE


Peer review policy

  • HOME
  • EDITORIAL POLICY
  • Peer review policy

An associate editor specializing in the field of the manuscript’s topic will assign two reviewers for the primary review of the manuscript. A review of the manuscript may be requested from reviewers specializing in the areas covered by the PAN, reviewers recommended by the authors, or external experts in the area. We do not release reviewers’ identities to authors, to conform to the journal’s double-blind peer review policy.

If changes are recommended, authors are encouraged to revise their manuscript. Authors submitting a revised manuscript must provide a point-by-point response regarding how the manuscript was revised based on reviewers’ feedback. The revised manuscript must be received within a month from the date of the letter from the editorial board indicating that a revised manuscript would be considered for publication. If the revised manuscript is not returned within this period, the board will assume that the author has decided not to pursue publication. Based on the review results and revisions, the associate editor will make the final decision regarding whether a manuscript is acceptable. If the review process is delayed for more than two weeks, authors may check the status of the manuscript review by text message, e-mail, or telephone call.

Regarding acceptance policy, a manuscript that has been recommended “accepted” by both reviewers in the final review will be published. A decision of “rejection” is made if both reviewers reject the publication of the manuscript in the final review. If one of the reviewers rejects the manuscript in the primary review, the associate editor will assign a third reviewer for another review. If both initial reviewers or two of the three reviewers reject the manuscript in the first review, the associate editor transfers the final decision regarding acceptance of the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief will then make the final decision at the editorial board meeting. If two of the three reviewers accept and one of them rejects the manuscript in the final review, the associate editor will transfer the final decision regarding acceptance of the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief will then make the final decision at the editorial board meeting.

A statistics consultant will review the statistical aspects of a manuscript, which will be reflected in the reviewers’ opinions. The editorial board may request the authors to oversee the final revision of English grammar in conjunction with an expert. Articles receiving final approval for publication are assigned to an English language consultant for review.

The following categories outline possible editor decisions based on reviewers’ feedback:
Accepted: The manuscript will be forwarded to the publisher without further corrections.
Minor revisions: The author should address the comments from the reviewers, which will be assessed by the reviewers before being sent to the publisher.
Major revisions: The author should address the comments from both reviewers and make appropriate corrections for another round of review.
Rejection: When one out of the reviewers rejects the manuscript, the final decision will be made by the editorial committee.




ABOUT
ARTICLE CATEGORY

Browse all articles >

BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Editorial Office
Korea University, 145 Anam-Ro, Seongbuk-gu,Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea
Tel: +82-10-2235-0018    Fax: +82-2-3290-2315    E-mail: jenbedit@gmail.com                

Copyright © 2021 by Korean Society for Exercise Nutrition.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next