Peer Review Policy

JMST employs a double-blind peer review system to ensure an unbiased and objective evaluation process.

Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and research experience.

The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed during the review process to minimize potential bias.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the field of rehabilitation and movement science.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive and detailed feedback to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts.

Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review if necessary.

The final decision to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor based on reviewer recommendations.

The entire process from submission to final publication, including online publication (epub), is typically completed within one year.

Appeals of decisions

Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office within 14 days of the decision notification. The appeal letter should contain a detailed justification and point-by-point responses to the reviewers' or editor's comments. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, will carefully review the appeal and may assign a new independent reviewer if deemed necessary. The subsequent decision by the Editor-in-Chief is final.

Handling of complaints

Complaints regarding the peer review and editorial processes may be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board, and the Editorial Board shall review the matter and notify the complainant of the outcome.