Review Guidelines

 

Peer Review Principles & Ethics

Ensuring Academic Quality, Integrity, and Reliability

The peer-review process is central to maintaining the academic quality, integrity, and reliability of published research. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following principles to provide objective, fair, and constructive evaluations.

Review Framework

1. Review Model

IJMHS follows a double-blind peer-review system, ensuring both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process.

Manuscripts are judged solely on scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s focus. This approach ensures impartiality and fairness in editorial decisions.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Conduct assessments objectively and professionally, free from bias.
  • Provide constructive feedback to help authors enhance the clarity, rigor, and overall quality of their work.
  • Evaluate the manuscript’s novelty, methodological soundness, relevance, and contribution to the field.
  • Maintain a professional and respectful tone, avoiding personal criticism.

Ethics & Integrity

3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts and all associated materials are strictly confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, share, or use any content from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional gain.

4. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise impartiality. If a conflict exists, reviewers should recuse themselves from evaluating the manuscript.

5. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers should report any concerns regarding plagiarism, unethical practices, data inconsistencies, or redundant publication to the editorial office.

All ethical issues are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and international standards of scholarly publishing.

Process & Recognition

6. Review Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to submit evaluations within the agreed timeframe to maintain an efficient editorial workflow. If delays are unavoidable, reviewers should notify the editorial team promptly.

7. Recommendations

Reviewers provide clear recommendations to the Editor:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

The final decision on publication rests with the Editor after considering all reviewer reports.

8. Recognition of Reviewers

Reviewers play a vital role in upholding the journal’s standards. Their contributions are acknowledged and valued as essential to maintaining the credibility, integrity, and scholarly quality of IJMHS.