Peer Review Policy

Overview

  • The Tamil Psychiatry Journal (TPJ) adheres to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the highest standards of scientific integrity, objectivity, and confidentiality.
  • All submitted manuscripts are critically evaluated by independent experts in psychiatry and mental health prior to editorial decision.
  • The review process aims to uphold academic quality and provide constructive feedback that assists authors in improving the clarity, rigor, and impact of their work.

Scope of Peer Review

  • All submitted manuscripts — including Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Case Reports, Short Communications, and Letters to the Editor — undergo peer review.
  • Editorials and invited commentaries may be reviewed at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary review by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to ensure:

  • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
  • Compliance with author guidelines and formatting requirements
  • Ethical and methodological soundness
  • Screening for plagiarism using standard detection tools

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be desk-rejected or returned for revision prior to external peer review.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process

TPJ employs a double-blind review system to maintain fairness and impartiality:

  • Reviewer identities are concealed from authors.
  • Author identities are concealed from reviewers.

Each manuscript is assigned to an independent reviewer with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers assess the submission based on the following criteria:

  • Scientific and clinical validity
  • Methodological rigor
  • Originality and contribution to psychiatric science
  • Clarity and coherence of presentation
  • Ethical compliance and research integrity

Editorial Decisions

Following peer review, the Editor-in-Chief (or designated Section Editor) evaluates the reviewers’ comments and determines one of the following outcomes:

  1. Accept
  2. Accept with minor revisions
  3. Revise and resubmit (major revisions required)
  4. Reject

Authors receive detailed feedback, including anonymous reviewer comments, to guide revisions and strengthen the manuscript.

Review Timeline

The average review period is approximately three weeks from submission to initial editorial decision, depending on reviewer availability.

Authors are notified promptly of the decision and expected to submit revised manuscripts within the timeframe specified by the editorial office.

Reviewer Ethics and Confidentiality

All TPJ reviewers are required to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality concerning manuscripts and associated data.
  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., prior collaboration, institutional affiliations, or professional competition).
  • Provide fair, objective, and evidence-based evaluations.
  • Use review materials solely within the context of the peer-review process.

Reviewer reports are treated as confidential documents and are not disclosed outside the editorial workflow.

Appeals and Re-Reviews

  • Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision must submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief explaining the basis of their request.
  • Appeals are independently reviewed by an editor or reviewer not involved in the original decision-making process.
  • The final determination on appeals rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Post-Acceptance Review

Following acceptance, all manuscripts undergo final technical and editorial checks, including:

  • Formatting and style compliance
  • Language clarity and consistency
  • Reference accuracy
  • Verification of author information and declarations

Only after these checks are completed will the manuscript proceed to final publication.

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

  • The Tamil Psychiatry Journal acknowledges the essential contribution of peer reviewers in maintaining publication quality
  • An annual list of reviewers may be published (with prior consent) to recognize their voluntary service, while maintaining confidentiality regarding individual review assignments.

Ethical Standards

TPJ adheres to the ethical principles and guidelines established by:

  • ICMJE – International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
  • COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics
  • WAME – World Association of Medical Editors

Any evidence of research or publication misconduct — including plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or duplicate submission — will be investigated and addressed according to COPE-recommended procedures.