Peer review process
We are happy to publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound. Reviews are thus applied for readability, clarity, technical correctness, and appropriate scope and interpretation. We consider that judgments about the importance of a paper are made after publication by the readership who are the most qualified to determine what is of interest to them. At JPH, we believe that articles should be assessed on their own merits rather than on the basis of the journal in which they were published. Accordingly, we believe that metrics such as the journal Impact Factor are misleading and malicious because they inevitably encourage journals to publish a small number of arbitrarily selected ‘good’ papers. If we are to encourage the use of a metric we believe that metrics such as the H5 factor are more defendable and less pernicious.
JPH encourages referees to sign their reviews.