1. Confidentiality of Reviewer Identities

JPADR follows a Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure fairness, impartiality, and independence throughout the editorial process. Reviewer confidentiality remains a fundamental component of the journal's peer-review policy.

Under this model:

• Reviewer identities are generally not disclosed to authors.
• Author identities are not disclosed to reviewers.
• Reviewer comments are communicated anonymously through the editorial office.

The journal maintains reviewer confidentiality to:

• Ensure impartial scientific evaluation.
• Reduce potential bias.
• Protect reviewer independence.
• Encourage objective and constructive assessment.

Reviewer identities will remain confidential unless:

• The reviewer voluntarily agrees to disclosure.
• Special editorial initiatives permit transparent peer review.
• Disclosure is required by applicable law or ethical investigation procedures.

2. Annual Reviewer Acknowledgement

JPADR may periodically recognize the valuable service provided by reviewers through formal acknowledgement initiatives while respecting confidentiality requirements and reviewer preferences.

Recognition activities may include:

• Annual reviewer acknowledgement lists.
• Reviewer appreciation announcements.
• Editorial acknowledgements.
• Reviewer recognition programs.

3. Reviewer Certificates

JPADR may issue formal certificates and letters of appreciation to recognize the valuable scholarly contributions made by reviewers during the peer-review process.

The journal may provide:

• Reviewer certificates.
• Certificates of appreciation.
• Editorial acknowledgement letters.

Certificates may be issued to reviewers who:

• Complete peer-review assignments satisfactorily.
• Submit reviews within stipulated timelines.
• Provide constructive, objective, and ethical evaluations.

Certificates may include:

• Reviewer name.
• Manuscript review period.
• Journal name.
• Editorial authorization.

Reviewer certificates are intended to support:

• Academic documentation.
• Professional development.
• Institutional appraisal activities.
• Recognition of scholarly service.

4. Publons and Web of Science Reviewer Recognition

JPADR supports ethical reviewer recognition through internationally recognized scholarly platforms that acknowledge peer-review contributions while preserving the confidentiality of the review process.

Where applicable, reviewers may choose to record their peer-review activities on recognized reviewer recognition platforms, such as:

• Publons.
• Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Services.

Where platform integration is available:

• Review content remains confidential.
• Manuscript details are not publicly disclosed unless permitted by journal policy and the reviewer.
• Reviewer participation may be verified through approved platform integration.

Reviewers remain responsible for complying with:

• Journal confidentiality requirements.
• Ethical peer-review standards.
• Platform-specific terms, conditions, and privacy policies.

5. Reviewer Contribution to Scholarly Publishing

JPADR recognizes that peer reviewers make an indispensable contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge and the maintenance of publication quality. Their expertise supports rigorous editorial evaluation and strengthens the credibility of published research.

Reviewer contributions include:

• Supporting scientific quality assurance.
• Improving manuscript clarity and overall quality.
• Identifying methodological limitations and weaknesses.
• Detecting potential ethical concerns.
• Strengthening research integrity.
• Promoting evidence-based scientific publishing.

6. Reviewer Performance and Professional Conduct

JPADR values reviewers who consistently demonstrate professionalism, scientific expertise, ethical conduct, and a commitment to providing high-quality peer reviews. Reviewer performance may be considered as part of the journal's continuous quality assurance process.

The journal values reviewers who demonstrate:

• Timely responses to review invitations.
• Submission of reviews within agreed timelines.
• Constructive and evidence-based feedback.
• High levels of scientific expertise.
• Professional and respectful communication.
• Integrity, impartiality, and ethical conduct.
• Appropriate confidential handling of manuscripts.

Reviewer performance may be considered for:

• Editorial Board invitations.
• Advanced reviewer recognition initiatives.
• Future manuscript review assignments.
• Reviewer excellence acknowledgements.
• Long-term collaboration with the journal.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Obligations

Reviewers are entrusted with confidential scholarly material and are expected to maintain the highest standards of integrity, professionalism, and ethical conduct throughout the peer-review process. These obligations continue even after completion of the review.

Reviewers must:

• Maintain strict confidentiality of all manuscripts and associated materials.
• Avoid sharing manuscript content with unauthorized individuals.
• Refrain from using unpublished information for personal, academic, or commercial benefit.
• Disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
• Conduct reviews objectively, respectfully, and without discrimination.
• Provide constructive, evidence-based, and professionally written comments.

Artificial Intelligence and Confidentiality

Reviewers should not upload confidential manuscripts or associated review materials into public or unauthorized artificial intelligence systems or other third-party platforms that could compromise manuscript confidentiality.

8. Reviewer Recognition Limitations

Reviewer recognition initiatives are designed to acknowledge scholarly service without compromising the integrity, independence, or confidentiality of the peer-review process.

Recognition activities must not compromise:

• Reviewer anonymity.
• Editorial independence.
• Confidentiality of manuscripts.
• Integrity of the peer-review process.

The journal reserves the right to withhold reviewer recognition in cases involving:

• Incomplete or abandoned reviews.
• Verified ethical concerns.
• Breach of confidentiality.
• Unprofessional or inappropriate conduct.
• Failure to comply with journal policies or reviewer responsibilities.

9. Commitment to Ethical and Transparent Peer Review

The Journal of Pharmacovigilance and Drug Research (JPADR) remains committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and ethically responsible peer-review system that supports scientific excellence and publication integrity.

JPADR is committed to:

• Ethical peer-review practices.
• Meaningful reviewer appreciation.
• Editorial transparency and accountability.
• Scientific integrity and research quality.
• Responsible scholarly publishing.
• Continuous improvement of peer-review standards.

References

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
2. Publons. Reviewer Recognition Standards.
3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.