Purpose of Peer Review

JNASSM operates a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and ethically sound research in sports science, exercise science, physical activity, health, and sports medicine. Reviewers play a critical role in safeguarding academic integrity, improving manuscript quality, and supporting evidence-based scholarship relevant to both Nigerian and global contexts.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

• Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
• Assess manuscripts strictly on academic merit, originality, and relevance
• Maintain confidentiality of all submitted materials
• Declare any conflict of interest before accepting a review
• Refrain from using unpublished material for personal research or advantage
• Submit reviews within the specified deadline (typically 1–2 weeks)

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

Relevance and Scope

• Is the topic aligned with JNASSM’s focus areas?
• Does it contribute meaningfully to sports science and medicine?
• Is the study relevant to local, regional, or global practice?

Originality and Contribution

• Does the manuscript present novel findings or insights?
• Does it advance knowledge, theory, policy, or practice?

Methodological Rigor

• Are research design and methods appropriate and clearly described?
• Are statistical analyses sound and properly reported?
• Are ethical approvals clearly stated where required?

Results and Interpretation

• Are results clearly presented?
• Are conclusions supported by the data?
• Are limitations acknowledged?

Structure and Clarity

• Is the manuscript well organized?
• Does it adhere to APA 7th edition guidelines?
• Is the language clear and scholarly?

Ethical Compliance

• Evidence of ethical approval (for human/animal studies)
• Proper citation and referencing
• Absence of plagiarism or data fabrication

Review Format

Reviewers are encouraged to structure their reports under the following headings:

1. Summary of the Manuscript
2. Major Strengths
3. Major Concerns (Methodological/Theoretical/Ethical)
4. Minor Comments (Clarity, Formatting, Language)
5. Recommendation
• Accept without revision
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

Constructive suggestions for improvement are strongly encouraged.

Ethical Standards for Reviewers

Reviewers must adhere to the highest standards of academic integrity:

• Maintain strict confidentiality
• Avoid personal criticism
• Evaluate fairly without bias related to gender, ethnicity, nationality, institutional affiliation, or theoretical perspective
• Report suspected ethical misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, data manipulation) to the Editor-in-Chief

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

If a reviewer identifies a potential conflict of interest, such as collaboration with the authors, institutional affiliation, or competitive interests, they must immediately inform the editorial office and decline the review if necessary.

Timeliness

Timely reviews are essential to maintaining publication efficiency. Reviewers who anticipate delays should notify the editorial office promptly.

Recognition of Reviewers

JNASSM acknowledges the valuable contribution of reviewers through:

• Annual publication of reviewer acknowledgments
• Certificates of review (upon request)
• Consideration for Editorial Advisory Board membership based on performance and commitment

Communication with the Editorial Office

All communications regarding manuscript evaluation should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief (Managing Editor) or the designated editorial contact. Reviewers should not contact authors directly.

Commitment to Excellence

Through responsible and rigorous peer review, JNASSM ensures that published articles contribute meaningfully to the advancement of sports science and medicine locally and globally. Reviewers are essential partners in this mission of scholarly excellence and professional integrity.