Peer-review Process

The Synergy: Journal of Outcome-Based Community Engagement is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and quality assurance. To ensure the validity, relevance, and impact of published community service articles, this journal employs a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process.

Both the reviewers' and authors' identities are kept strictly confidential throughout the evaluation process. The workflow consists of the following structured stages:

1

Initial Editorial Desk Review

Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary assessment to verify the manuscript's alignment with the journal's Focus and Scope. In this phase, the manuscript undergoes a strict plagiarism check using Turnitin (maximum similarity tolerance is typically 20%). Most importantly, manuscripts failing to present the Mandatory Outcome-Based Requirements (baseline data, measurable impacts, and sustainability plans) will be immediately Desk Rejected without further review.

2

Double-Blind Review Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to the respective Track's Section Editor (Agro-Economic, Health, or Social & Institutional). The Section Editor will assign at least two independent expert reviewers who possess specialized knowledge relevant to the manuscript's field. Reviewers are given a standard timeframe of 2 to 4 weeks to complete their comprehensive evaluation.

3

Editorial Decision & Revision

Based on the reviewers' feedback and recommendations, the Section Editor and Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision. Possible decisions include: Accept Submission, Revisions Required (minor or major), or Decline Submission. Authors required to revise their manuscripts must submit the updated version along with a clear response letter detailing the modifications.

Key Review Criteria

During the peer-review process, our independent reviewers use a standardized assessment form that heavily weights the following core aspects:

  • Community Problem Identification: Sharpness and relevance of the initial baseline data.
  • Methodological Accuracy: Systematic implementation of the empowerment or engagement method.
  • Impact & Transformation: The presence of verifiable quantitative or qualitative outcomes directly resulting from the program.
  • Quality Assurance & Sustainability: Strategies ensuring the program remains viable post-intervention.