The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal uses the following open-source software application - Open Journal Systems (OJS) for managing and archiving the scientific articles, and as long-term preservation service, where each article is currently archived.

Open Journal Systems (OJS) was developed and released by PKP in 2001, in order to improve access to research, being the world’s most widely used scholarly publishing platform (see https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/).

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal allows authors to deposit versions of their work in an institutional or other repository of their choice.

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal allows authors to deposit the Published version of their manuscript in an institutional or other repository of their choice, such as: Academia.edu, ResearchGate, Google Scholar. The authors are allowed to use and reposit their own published manuscript, by downloading it from the journal website:  www.discobolulunefs.ro, but no modifications are allowed (e.g., article’s repaginating or reformatting).

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal provides repository within the Open Journal Systems (OJS) open-source software application, for the following versions:
a)      Submitted version – reposited in OJS, but not publicly available
b)      Accepted version (Author Accepted Manuscript) – reposited in OJS, but not publicly available
c)      Published version – reposited in OJS, and publicly available (open access)

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal uses persistent article identifiers for its articles, more exactly, the digital object identifier (DOI), finding a manuscript no matter where it is located,

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal uses DOIs, as a CrossRef member, for all its open access articles, from 2019 (starting with the International Proceedings of Human Motricity/ ICPESK 2019 Supplementary Issue of Discobolul – Physical Education, Sport and Kinetotherapy Journal).

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal is published and licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made to the original. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

No additional restrictions - You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Co-authorship

If a manuscript was prepared by more than one author, any authors submitting the manuscript warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to be agreed on this copyright and license notice (agreement) on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this policy. Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal will not be held liable for anything that may arise due to the author(s) internal dispute.

Learn more about Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licensing.

Policy on Authorship Criteria

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal Editorial Board follows the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet the appropriate requirements.

 

According to COPE, authorship can refer to individuals or groups that create an idea or develop the publication that disseminates that intellectual or creative work. (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.3.3)

To qualify as an author, an individual should meet the following criteria:

Substantial Contribution: Involvement in the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.

Manuscript Drafting: Participation in drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.

Final Approval: Approval of the version to be published.

Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet all four authorship criteria should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgments section, with their contributions specified (e.g., technical support, data collection, general supervision). Their consent must be obtained before publication.

Changes in Authorship: Any changes to the authorship list after submission should be agreed upon by all authors and justified to the journal.

Requests to add or remove an author, or to rearrange the order of authors, after submission must be approved by all authors, including the author(s) being added or removed. A formal request with a written explanation and signed consent from all affected parties must be submitted to the editorial office. The editor-in-chief reserves the right to seek clarification or deny changes inconsistent with ethical standards.

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for:

• Ensuring all co-authors meet authorship criteria.
• Managing communications between the journal and all authors.
• Handling post-publication responsibilities such as responding to inquiries or corrections.

Authorship Disputes: In cases of authorship disputes, COPE advises referring the matter to the relevant institutions, as journals are not equipped to adjudicate such disputes.

 

Before the scientific articles are sent to review and, also, before publication, all scientific articles will be checked so they are free from plagiarism practice using a Plagiarism Checker software - "sistemantiplagiat.ro" - which is a computer program for comparing documents in text format; it was created in 2002 by the company Plagiat.pl from Poland. If there are any indications of plagiarism of more than 20% for Similarity Coefficient 1 and 5% for Similarity Coefficient 2, the manuscript will be subject to extensive verification in accordance to the Guideline for the interpretation of the Similarity Report Sistemantiplagiat.ro, which accompanies the program, where it is mentioned that exceeding these thresholds does not categorically indicate plagiarism.

Sanctions will be applied in case of detected plagiarism/ misconduct : Refusal to accept future submissions from the individual, unit, or institution responsible for the misconduct, for a period of 2 years.

Plagiarism refers to using the ideas, words, graphics or tables of others and presenting them as your own, being a form of fraud. From accidentally copying from a source without obtaining permission from the rights holder to deliberately seeking academic advantage by replicating the work of others, articles that are found to have been plagiarized will be rejected (we include submitted manuscript or published article).

Plagiarism screening will be conducted by Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal Editorial Board using: sistemantiplagiat.ro.

Retraction

The articles published in Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal will be considered to retract if:

a)      they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of honest error (for example, experimental error, miscalculation) or misconduct (for example, data fabrication)

b)      the findings have previously been published elsewhere

c)      it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction will follow the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal wants to assure the readers that authors of publications present the results of their work in an honest, reliable, and clear manner. We believe in the ethical meaning of all manuscripts in order to develop the knowledge in the field.

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal Editorial Board follows the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet the appropriate requirements. Scientific articles not conforming to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki should be rejected for publication.

In the context of data publication, Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal follows community best practices on data publishing ethics and aligns with the recommendations and workflows published by the FORCE11 & COPE Research Data PUblishing Ethics Working Group.

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal will follow up on any ethical concerns about the data associated with a submitted manuscript or a published article. Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal will follow due process in accordance with COPE guidelines and the FORCE11 & COPE Working Group recommendations to inform whether any actions may be required about a dataset or an article.

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal reserves the right to remove or disable access or links to a published dataset and/or associated content in order to address a legal or ethical concern, a publication ethics issue, or a breach in journal policy.

Per the Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal discretion, we may also remove access to published data and/or linked articles while such concerns are under investigation. In the context of any data publishing concerns, Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal may contact other parties that host content associated with the dataset (e.g. a data repository) and may contact the institution(s) of relevant authors if required.

https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/concerns-legal-unpublished-data_0.pdf

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal follows legal framework and obligations in Romania and may have a legal obligation to inform the authorities in its own jurisdiction if a legal breach is identified in relation to the content in a submission or a publication in the journal.

When dealing with cases of a possible misconduct Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal follows the ethics flowcharts developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts

The journal Editorial Board and Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to expose any cases of plagiarism, redundant (duplicate) publication, ghostwriting, fabricated data, guest authorship etc., and to inform the relevant institutions or affiliations (institutions employing the author, scientific editor’s associations, scientific societies, etc.).

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal shows no tolerance to fraudulent activities. The Journal’s Editorial Board follows the code of conduct set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

In the case of a published article for which concerns are raised, the journal will do all the necessary actions for the manuscript to be re-reviewed, in accordance with guidance from the COPE. Therefore, the editorial decision will be made based on the re-reviews and this may result in correcting the academic record. 

Duties and responsibilities of authors

1)      Authors should present their results honestly, without inappropriate data manipulation and without competing interests. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit other researchers to replicate the study. Scientific articles should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

2)      Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process, to correct any errors upon discovery, prior or subsequent to publication of their manuscript.

3)      Submitting the same paper to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

4)      The paper should not be published elsewhere prior to acceptance/rejection by this Journal and a copyright permission should be obtained for materials published elsewhere and which require this permission for reproduction.

5)      Previous ideas, publications should be properly referenced. We encourage authors to cite the primary literature. Multiple papers arising from the same research project should be identified, the primary publication being referenced. Acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

6)      Authors should expose the authorship of the paper, by ensuring that: all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication; all persons credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work. Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal in the matter of authorship criteria, respects COPE recommendations.

7)      Author(s) are responsible for disclosing all personal and financial relationships that might bias their work. All sources of financial support should be disclosed.

8)      Before accepting the manuscript for publication, authors can withdraw the article by submitting a statement in the electronic system - Open Journal Systems (OJS).

 

For Reviewers

• Articles respect double-blind peer review process (the identity of both the reviewers and authors is hidden), therefore, information regarding the paper should be kept confidential.
• The reviewers must alert journal Editorial Board (www.discobolulunefs.ro) of any potential competing interest that could affect the quality of the review, and should not consider the manuscripts (should decline the review).
• Reviewers (if is a legitimate need) should point out important published manuscripts which are not yet cited; all judgments in the peer-review process must be objective and reviewers should express their point of view with supporting arguments.
• The reviewers must agree to review a manuscript only if they are aware that they can return a review in a reasonable time-frame (two weeks); reviewers should inform journal Editorial Board if they require an extension.

We encourage reviewers to refer to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers as appropriate.

 

Duties of Editor

The Editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the paper, based on the reviewers  observations. During this process, editors must act fair and objective, without discrimination of religious, gender, political beliefs, geographical origin or sexual orientation of the authors.

Editors must cooperate with authors and reviewers, in order to ensure a qualitative, unbiased review process, and, in the same time, the confidentiality of the reviewing process. Editors should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

     Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal adopts the World Association of Medical Editors’ definition of editorial freedom/ independence. Therefore, Editor-in-Chief has the final say in decisions about which manuscript and when appears. Authors are obliged to respect the concept of editorial freedom and should not interfere in the selection, evaluation, scheduling, or editing of individual papers.

In the situation when there are concerns regarding the research procedure presented in the scientific article, the journal Editorial Board can request from the authors to submit data considering the approval of the mentioned research procedure by an adequate ethics committee.

COPE Core Practices

 Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest arises when personal, financial, professional, or institutional relationships may inappropriately influence or appear to influence an individual’s objectivity in conducting or evaluating scholarly work.

Conflicts of interest can be:

-          Financial: e.g., grants, projects, consulting fees.

-          Non-financial: e.g., personal relationships, academic rivalry, ideological beliefs.

Authors

Disclosure Requirement - Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest relevant to the manuscript. This includes:

-          Funding sources

-          Employment or consultancies

-          Personal relationships with reviewers or editors.

How to Disclose

-          A mandatory conflict of interest statement must be included with each manuscript (follow Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal Template).

-          If no conflict of interest exists, a declaration such as: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest” must be stated.

Undisclosed conflicts of interest discovered post-publication may result in correction, retraction, or other editorial action.

Reviewers

Obligation to Recuse

Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that may compromise objectivity. This includes:

-          Personal or professional ties to authors

-          Competing research interests

-          Financial incentives

If a conflict of interest exists - Reviewers must decline the invitation.

Confidentiality - Reviewers must not use knowledge of the manuscript for personal gain.

Editors and Journal Staff

Transparency - Editors and staff must disclose conflicts of interest relating to:

-          Handling manuscripts from colleagues, collaborators, or institutions

-          Financial interests in outcomes of publication.

Editorial Recusal - Editors must not make decisions on manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

Management - An alternate editor or editorial board member without conflict of interest will handle such cases.

Publisher/ Journal Owner

Editorial Independence

All policies and decisions in the case of Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal uphold:

-          Editorial autonomy

-          Transparency

-          Integrity of the peer review process

Retractions

Articles within Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal may be retracted for:

• Plagiarism;
• Fabricated or falsified data;
• Unethical research;
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest that invalidate conclusions;
• Major errors affecting reliability.

Retraction Process:

-          Initiation: By authors, editors, or third parties.

-          Investigation: Transparent and thorough; author response sought.

-          Notice: Clearly labeled as a “Retraction”; explains reasons and responsible parties.

-          Accessibility: Retraction remains linked to the original article and freely available.

 

Commitment to Ethical Publishing

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal adheres to the COPE Core Practices and is committed to ensuring transparency, integrity, and accountability throughout the publication process.

COPE Core Practices

 

Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal

Applicable to Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

 

This policy outlines acceptable use of generative AI technologies (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude etc) in manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial processes. It ensures transparency, integrity, and accountability in the scientific publication process, specifically within the domain of sport science.

For Authors

 Permissible Uses:

-         Language editing and clarity improvement (e.g., grammar correction, restructuring sentences).

-         Idea generation or brainstorming (must be independently validated).

-         Formatting assistance or summarizing prior published work (with proper citations).

Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control and authors should carefully review and edit the result, because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.

 Prohibited Uses:

-         Automated generation of research data, results, or statistical analyses.

-         Ghostwriting of sections (e.g., introduction, discussion) without full disclosure.

-         Failure to acknowledge AI assistance in manuscript creation.

Disclosure Requirement:

If AI tools are used, authors must clearly disclose in the manuscript (e.g., in the Acknowledgements or a dedicated section) specifying:

Tool name and version (e.g., "ChatGPT, GPT-4, OpenAI")

Nature of use (e.g., "used for language editing of draft")

Confirmation that all scientific claims were human-validated.

Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies and a statement will appear in the published work. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.

Example of Statement:

“The authors used ChatGPT (OpenAI, GPT-4) to enhance clarity in the introduction. All content was critically reviewed and verified by the authors.”

 

Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission.

 

For Reviewers

When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

 

Permissible Uses:

Clarifying manuscript language via AI for non-native speakers.

Summarizing long sections to assist comprehension (if not shared externally).

Prohibited Uses:

Uploading or copying any part of the manuscript into AI tools not governed by strict confidentiality agreements.

Using AI tools to generate review content or decisions without critical oversight.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must not input confidential manuscript content into AI tools unless explicitly allowed by the journal under secure systems. Breach of confidentiality will be treated as a serious ethical violation.

 

For Editors

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Editors may not use AI to generate or finalize editorial decisions (accept/reject). Editors hold a fiduciary duty to maintain the confidentiality of all submitted content. When AI tools are used, please ensure no sensitive manuscript content (e.g., figures, raw data, personal identifiers) is uploaded to third-party platforms without journal-approved security.

 

Permissible Uses:

Administrative support: summarizing author responses, aiding editorial letters. Drafting standard communications (e.g., revision requests, reminders).

Workflow efficiency: matching reviewers, formatting decisions.

Language refinement: Editing internal notes, correspondence, or editorial summaries.

Prohibited Uses:

Delegating editorial judgment or acceptance/rejection decisions to AI tools.

Relying on AI-generated summaries without independent editorial assessment.

 

Oversight Duties

Editors are responsible for ensuring that AI disclosures by authors are complete.

AI tools may be used internally under strict compliance with data confidentiality policies.

 

General Ethical Guidelines

Generative AI must never replace human accountability in scientific publishing.

Use of AI must adhere to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and ICMJE guidelines.

Violations may result in manuscript rejection, retraction, or disciplinary action.

 

Discobolul states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure (see instructions above).

If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the editorial office.

 

Periodic Review

This policy will be updated periodically to reflect advances in AI technologies and evolving ethical standards in scholarly publishing.

 

*Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that can produce various types of content including text, imagery, audio and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, DALL-E, etc.

 

The articles that are published in the Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal follow a double blind peer-review procedure.

The manuscript is submitted by author(s) in English language using the Open Journal Systems (OJS).

• Received manuscripts are first examined by Editorial Board members (by Editor-in-chief or by the Deputy Editor-in-chief) according to Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal ‘technical’ requirements (https://discobolulunefs.ro/media/Instructions_for_Authors_2020.pdf). Incomplete manuscripts, if English is not of good standard, or papers that are not respecting the available Template (including information considering the preparation of the manuscript) will be returned to author(s) with suggestions for correction. After the paper is improved adequately, the manuscript receives a unique identification code which will be used in the following discussions related to the manuscript. At this stage the article is sent to two reviewers for scientific evaluation.
• Each reviewer writes the Reviewer’s Report where he/she mentions one of the following:

- Accepted without any revisions - the journal will publish the paper in its original form;

- Accepted with minor changes - in this case the paper cannot be published, for the moment; the authors have to make necessary corrections;

- Accepted with major revisions (major flows are identified by the reviewers);

- Rejected - the research procedure, statistics, or figures are so poor that the merit of the manuscript cannot be assessed, the manuscript is just a small extension of a different article (often from the same authors), or the paper contains elements that are suspected to be plagiarized.

• After the two independent reviewers endorsed publication, one of the Reviewing Editors reads, also, the manuscript, examining, mainly, the descriptive and inferential statistics and the research procedure.
• The Proofreading Editor takes a critical look before publication. At this stage, also, if the Proofreading Editor considers that English is not of good standard, the manuscript can return to authors with suggestions for corrections.    

 

       If reviewers appear to differ in their opinion, the Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy Editor-in-chief together with a Reviewing Editor will assess the article, will consider all comments and take the final decision.         

       It should be noted that the author(s) must send the revised version of the article in 10 days’ time since he/she received the Reviewers’ Report or the Editorial Board’s feed-back. Then, the Editorial Board sends the revised version of the paper to the reviewer(s). This process lasts until the reviewer(s) endorses (or rejects) the manuscript.  

Overview

Editors of academic journals in sports science are entrusted with upholding the integrity, quality, and ethical standards of scholarly publishing. Their responsibilities are guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

Editors play a pivotal role in the academic publishing process, ensuring that the content published is of high quality, ethically sound, and contributes meaningfully to the field. Their duties encompass manuscript evaluation, peer review management, ethical oversight, and strategic development of the journal.

 

Key Responsibilities

 

1. Editorial Oversight and Decision-Making

Manuscript Evaluation: Assess submissions for relevance, originality, and contribution to the field.

Peer Review Management: Ensure a fair, unbiased, and timely review process.

Final Decisions: Make publication decisions based on the manuscript's merit and reviewer feedback.

2. Ethical Standards and Integrity

Adherence to Ethical Guidelines: Follow COPE's Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines to handle ethical issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, and conflicts of interest.

Confidentiality: Maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and the identities of reviewers.

3. Journal Development and Strategy

Scope and Content: Ensure the journal's content reflects current developments and emerging areas in sports science.

Editorial Board Management: Select and engage with the editorial board to guide the journal's direction.

Promotion: Promote the journal to attract high-quality submissions and increase its visibility in the academic community.

 

Additional information

Editors of sports science journals, guided by COPE policies, are responsible for ensuring the publication of high-quality and ethically sound research. Their duties encompass overseeing the peer review process, maintaining ethical standards, developing the journal's scope, and collaborating with the authors, reviewers and journal editors to uphold the integrity of the academic record.

 

Maintain Confidentiality

Treat submitted manuscripts as confidential intellectual property.

Do not disclose content, data, or results outside the peer review process.

Avoid using unpublished findings for personal research or discussion.

Ensure Field-Appropriate Scientific Rigor

Study Design: Critically evaluate whether the study design aligns with the research question (e.g., crossover trials, randomized controlled trials, longitudinal training interventions etc.).

Are training protocols, control conditions, and athlete selection appropriate?

Population Specificity: Check that participants (e.g., elite athletes, recreational subjects) are clearly defined and relevant to the research scope (check the number, age, gender distribution, competitive experience, the club to which the athletes are affiliated etc).

Ecological Validity: Consider whether experimental conditions realistically reflect sport-specific contexts.

Evaluate Methods and Measurement Tools

Assess whether instruments used (e.g., VO₂max tests, motion capture, force plates, psychological scales) are validated, reliable, and appropriate.

Examine the detail and transparency of protocols (e.g., warm-up, rest periods, environment control).

Flag inadequate reporting of operational definitions or outcome measures.

Scrutinize Statistical Analysis

Confirm appropriateness of statistical tests for study design (e.g., ANOVA, repeated measures, effect sizes etc.).

Check if assumptions/ conditions (normality, homogeneity) were verified.

Ensure use of confidence intervals, practical significance, and effect sizes rather than relying solely on p-values.

 

 

Review Interpretation and Theoretical Framing

Are findings interpreted in context with existing sport science theories (e.g., motor learning, periodization models, overtraining syndrome)?

Does the discussion involve the study's limitations and avoids overgeneralizing?

Is there a logical link between results and practical implications for coaches, trainers, athletes and other specialists?

Does the Discussion critically interpret the authors' own results in light of current scientific literature, and are relevant references cited appropriately?

Assess Novelty and Relevance

Judge whether the manuscript offers a novel insight into athletic performance, injury prevention, sports psychology, biomechanics, or related subfields.

Ensure the findings are transferable to real-world sport or training settings.

Promote Ethical Compliance

Confirm that ethical approval and informed written consent are stated, especially for invasive protocols or vulnerable populations (e.g., youth athletes).

Verify adherence to international standards like the Declaration of Helsinki or WADA code (when applicable).

Review the Quality of Writing and Data Presentation

Check clarity of figures, tables, and units (e.g., watts, m·s⁻¹, mmol·L⁻¹).

Ensure that all tables and figures are appropriately referenced and integrated into the narrative of the text.

Ensure terminology follows field conventions (e.g., use of "training load," "rate of perceived exertion").

Suggest restructuring if data presentation obscures key insights.

Identify and Report Ethical and Scientific Misconduct

Flag duplicated publication, text recycling, data fabrication, or ghost authorship.

Notify the editor confidentially of any suspicions.

Deliver Constructive, Detailed Feedback

Provide point-by-point critique across:

•  
  • Introduction: clarity of research gap.
  • Methods: reproducibility and validity.
  • Results: transparency and completeness.
  • Discussion: logic, contextualization, practical relevance.

Offer actionable suggestions for improvement.

Respect Journal Scope and Audience

Recommend rejection if the manuscript:

•  
  • Does not fit within the journal's aims and scope.
  • Targets an audience too narrow or lacks applied value.

Respect Deadlines and Anonymity

Respond promptly to review invitations.

Deliver reviews by the deadline or notify editors early of delays.

Adhere to the journal's anonymity policy (e.g., double-blind peer review).

Compliance with Journal Template and Formatting Guidelines

Ensure that the manuscript follows the journal's required structure and formatting style (e.g., IMRaD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussions/ Conclusion).

Letter	Section	Purpose
I	Introduction	Describes the research problem, background, and objectives. Answers: Why was this study done?
M	Methods	Explains how the study was conducted. Includes design, participants, procedures, and analysis. Answers: How was it done?
R	Results	Presents the findings, often with tables or figures. Answers: What was found?
D	Discussion	Interprets the results in context of existing literature, limitations, and implications. Answers: What do the results mean?

COPE – Complaints and Appeals

https://publicationethics.org/news-opinion/complaints-and-appeals

 Step 1. Acknowledge the Complaint

Action: Acknowledge receipt of the complaint within 5 business days.

Responsibility: Editorial Office/ Managing Editor.

Details to Include:

-          Confirmation of receipt (from journal's email address).

-          Expected timeline for investigation.

-          Contact point for follow-up.

Step 2. Preliminary Review

Action: Assess the nature and scope of the complaint.

Determine:

-          Is the complaint about an editorial decision, staff conduct, publication ethics, or review process?

-          Does it warrant a full investigation?

Outcome:

-          Escalate valid concerns to the appropriate authority (e.g. Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor or other Editors of the journal).

-          Inform complainant if no grounds are found (with justification).

Step 3. Internal Investigation

Action: Conduct a formal review.

Methods:

-   Interview relevant staff or editors.

-   Review submission and editorial history logs.

-   Assess COPE/ ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) policy adherence.

Responsibility: Typically led by Deputy Editor, Editorial board members or a designated Ethics Committee.

Step 4. Decision and Action

Timeframe: Within 4–6 weeks of receiving the complaint.

Outcomes:

-          Substantiated Complaint:

• Apology to complainant.
• Rectify procedural error.
• Retract or correct publication (if needed).
• Training or disciplinary action (in severe cases).

-          Unsubstantiated Complaint:

• Provide rationale and evidence behind the decision.

Communication: Send formal written decision to the complainant.

Step 5. Record-Keeping

Maintain confidential documentation of:

•  
  • Complaint content.
  • Investigation steps and findings.
  • Final decision and communication log.

Duration: Retain for at least 5 years (as per institutional or legal requirements).

Step 6. Escalation Protocol

Only one appeal per submission is allowed.

If complainant is dissatisfied, they may request external mediation via COPE.