Home > HIP


Information for Reviewers

Peer Review

Both practicing health professionals and health professions educators are encouraged to participate in the peer review process for the journal by becoming reviewers. If you are interested in reviewing articles for Health and Interprofessional Practice, please contact the editors at hip@pacificu.edu.

Health and Interprofessional Practice uses a rigorous, double blind peer evaluation process for all submissions which are subject to peer review (Original Research, Case-Based Learning, Review Articles, Cross Cultural Issues in Care). Upon submission, each article is reviewed by the appropriate section editor for relevance and quality (including methodological quality, potential ethical issues and quality of writing). After this initial review, the article is assigned to at least two peer reviewers. Preference is given for the use of two double blind reviewers (neither the author nor the reviewer will know the others' identity). However, if two appropriate external reviewers cannot be identified, editorial board members may serve as reviewers (and will notify authors regarding the non-blind nature of the review process). [Policy updated 09.2013]

Reviewers are assigned on the basis of expertise and familiarity with the content of the submission in question. Whenever possible, the professions represented in a submission will be matched with reviewers from the same discipline. However, though some submissions will include several different professions, it is not practical to require review of the submission by a professional from each discipline represented. In these cases, reviewers will be selected on the basis of their expertise of the subject/methodology at hand, regardless of their professional affiliation. If it is deemed absolutely necessary due to questions related a specific profession, the editor may seek input from additional reviewers. Reviewers independently supply the section editor with a recommendation to accept, require revisions of, or reject the submission. Final publication decisions will be determined through consultation between the section editor and editor-in-chief.

The reviewers' critique template for Original Theory and Research manuscripts is available at: original theory research reviewer template.

The reviewers' critique template for Educational Strategies manuscripts is available at: educational strategies reviewer template.

Editorial Review

For submissions not requiring peer review (Book/EBP Resource Reviews, From the Field: Student Experiences and Editorial/Commentary), the appropriate section editor will review the submission for relevance and quality and make a recommendation to the editor-in chief regarding a publication decision.

If necessary due to the complexity or unfamiliarity of content, section editors may solicit external reviews for these submissions. If an external reviewer is used, the procedure for peer review detailed above will be followed.