The Philippine Journal of Cardiology handles manuscripts and peer review through the following process:

1. Submission of Paper: The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is usually via email to the Philippine Heart Association (PHA) secretariat or the Philippine Journal of Cardiology (PJC) email (philjc2021@gmail.com). Researches submitted to the PHA for the research contests of the Annual Convention are all considered submitted to the PJC and will be processed after the results of the research contest are announced subject to consent of the author.
2. Editorial Office Assessment: The Editorial Office checks that the paper adheres to the requirements described in the journal’s Author Guidelines. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point. The editorial team then assesses the paper, considering its scope, originality and merits. The paper may be rejected at this stage.
3. Invitation for peer reviewers: The managing editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline the invitation to review. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of reviewers is secured – commonly this is 2.
4. Review is Conducted: The Journal utilizes a double-blind internal peer-review process. The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with the reviewer’s recommendation (e.g. to revise, accept or reject the paper).
5. Journal Evaluates the Reviews: The handling editor considers all the returned reviews then makes a recommendation to the editor-in-chief. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
6. The Decision is Communicated: The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Comments will be anonymous. If the decision is to revise, the revised manuscript will be reviewed by the handing editor before recommending a decision. The final decision will be made by the editor-in-chief.