Reviewer Guide

Thank you for agreeing to review for Applied Health Promotion Science (AHPROCE). Your expert evaluation safeguards the journal’s quality, integrity, and impact. This guide details expectations, review criteria, timelines, and how to submit reviews in OJS 3.4.

1. Purpose & Scope

The goal of peer review is to evaluate a manuscript’s originality, scientific rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to health promotion practice and policy. Assess whether the submission advances knowledge and is suitable for publication in AHPROCE.

2. Confidentiality & Ethical Standards

• Confidentiality: Treat all files/data as confidential. Do not share, quote, or use for personal research.
• Conflicts of Interest: If you have financial/personal/academic conflict or a close collaboration with authors/institutions, decline or disclose immediately.
• Impartiality: Base your review on evidence/methods — not author identity, affiliation, or country.
• Data Protection: Do not upload manuscripts to third-party tools/public AI services. If using local grammar tools, ensure content isn’t retained by the service.
• COPE-aligned: Our processes adhere to best practice guidance consistent with COPE.

3. How to Review in OJS (Step-by-Step)

1. Respond: From the invitation email/OJS dashboard, click Accept or Decline (ideally within 3 days).
2. Access Files: Open the assigned submission; download manuscript & supplementary files.
3. Read Guidance: Review this page and any checklists attached to the review form.
4. Evaluate: Assess using the criteria below; note major/minor issues.
5. Write Comments: Fill structured comments in the review form; you may also upload a marked file (track changes) and summarize key points in text boxes.
6. Recommendation: Select decision (Accept / Minor Rev / Major Rev / Reject), then submit.
7. Re-review (if requested): Focus on whether prior concerns are fully addressed.

4. What to Assess (Criteria)

• Originality & Significance — novelty, contribution to health promotion, practice/policy relevance.
• Fit to Scope — alignment with AHPROCE’s aims and audience.
• Literature & Rationale — clear research gap; current, appropriate references.
• Methods & Ethics — design suitability; sampling; instruments; validity; IRB/ethics approval; consent; trial registration when applicable.
• Analysis — appropriate statistics/qualitative analyses; effect sizes & CIs; assumptions; sensitivity analyses; transparency/reproducibility.
• Results — clarity; coherence with methods; effective tables/figures; no duplication.
• Discussion — accurate interpretation; implications; limitations; generalizability; future directions.
• Transparency — data/code availability statements; funding & conflicts clearly stated.
• Writing Quality — organization, clarity, adherence to journal style (APA 7), correct figure/table captions.

5. Rating Rubric (1 = Poor … 5 = Excellent)

6. Constructive Feedback — Template & Examples

• Brief Summary (2–4 lines): State what the manuscript does and its main contribution.
• Major Issues: e.g., design flaws, missing ethics/IRB, inadequate analysis, unsupported claims, unclear methods.
• Minor Issues: e.g., clarity/organization, figure/table labeling, APA 7 references.
• Confidential to Editor: Use for sensitive concerns (suspected plagiarism, overlapping submissions, undisclosed conflicts).

7. Decision Categories (Meaning)

• Accept: Only minor editorial/formatting tweaks remain.
• Minor Revisions: Limited, specific changes; no major re-analysis.
• Major Revisions: Substantial methodological/analytical/structural changes; may require re-review.
• Reject: Fundamental flaws, out of scope, or insufficient contribution.

8. Timelines & Extensions

Please submit reviews by the invitation deadline (commonly 2–4 weeks). If you need more time, request an extension early so we can manage the editorial schedule.

9. Pre-Submission Checklist

• Scores/rubric items completed and consistent with comments.
• Major/minor issues clearly distinguished with actionable suggestions.
• Confidential note to editor added (if applicable).
• Any annotated file uploaded and key points summarized in text boxes.
• No confidential or identifying information disclosed in blinded fields.

10. Reviewer Recognition

• Certificates of Reviewing available upon request.
• Annual acknowledgement of active reviewers on the journal website (opt-in).
• You may list verified reviews on your CV/professional profiles.

11. Useful Resources

• Reporting guidelines: CONSORT (trials), PRISMA (systematic reviews), STROBE (observational), SQUIRE (QI/implementation).
• Ethics & integrity: COPE guidance and flowcharts.
• Transparency: Encourage effect sizes, CIs, and data/code availability statements where feasible.

12. Contact

Questions or technical issues during review? Email the editorial office:
ahproce@analysisdata.co.id