Peer Review Process

Type of Peer Review
The Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Primasakti employed the Double-blind peer review: Both the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to ensure objectivity.

Submission Process
Authors must submit manuscripts through the JPMP online submission system.
An initial editorial assessment is conducted to evaluate the manuscript's relevance, originality, and compliance with journal guidelines. 

Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, scholarly experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.
Each manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent experts.

Review Criteria
Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
Originality and importance of the manuscript
Soundness and appropriateness of the methodology
Clarity and coherence of presentation
Relevance to the focus and scope of Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Primasakti

Decision Outcomes:
Accept without revisions: The manuscript is considered suitable for publication without further modifications and can proceed to the copyediting phase.
Accept with minor revisions: Minor changes are necessary and can be reviewed and approved by the editor.
Revise and resubmit: Significant revisions are required, necessitating another round of peer review.
Resubmit elsewhere: The manuscript does not align with the journal's focus and scope and may be better suited for submission to a different publication.
Decline or reject submission: The manuscript exhibits significant weaknesses and is deemed unsuitable for publication in the Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Primasakti.

Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewer feedback and editorial judgment.

Review Timeline
Initial editorial screening: within 7 days
Completion of peer review: within 4–6 weeks
Final decision notification: within 8 weeks

Expected Review
Manuscripts of urgent relevance to public health or nursing practice may be eligible for expedited peer review at the discretion of the editorial team.

Appeal Process
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written justification. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial committee.

Ethical Considerations
Compliance with COPE guidelines is mandatory.
Suspected cases of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or ethical misconduct will be thoroughly investigated.
Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality and disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

Transparency
Peer review policies are publicly available on the journal website.
Comprehensive records of editorial decisions and reviewer communications are securely maintained.

Policy Updates
JPMP periodically revises its peer review policies to ensure continuous alignment with international standards and best practices.