Review Guidelines
Quality Assurance & Integrity Framework
Peer Review Principles & Ethics
The EPH - International Journal of Medical and Health Science (IJMHS) is profoundly grateful for the dedication and expertise provided by our global network of reviewers. Peer review is an essential, voluntary service that maintains the quality of the scientific record. To ensure that every manuscript is judged solely on its scientific contribution, we employ a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review System.
The Double-Blind Advantage:
By ensuring that the identities of both the authors and the reviewers remain completely anonymous, we eliminate potential biases associated with gender, seniority, institutional affiliation, or geographical origin. This structure allows our reviewers to provide candid, impartial assessments and ensures that the focus remains exclusively on the methodology, data, and clinical significance of the research.
1. Preliminary Editorial Review
All submissions undergo an initial screening by the editorial office to verify scope relevance, ethical compliance, and structural adherence. Only manuscripts that meet our baseline standards for originality and academic merit proceed to formal peer review.
2. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for scientific validity, methodological rigor, and the reproducibility of results. A premium is placed on clarity of presentation and the work's potential to advance clinical or theoretical knowledge.
3. Confidentiality & Ethical Safeguards
Manuscripts under review are privileged, unpublished documents. Reviewers are bound by strict confidentiality mandates. IJMHS actively guards against duplicate submission, redundant publication, and unethical research practices. We reserve the right to reject a manuscript at any stage if ethical or scientific integrity is compromised.
4. Editorial Authority & Outcomes
Based on the independent evaluations of the peer reviewers, the editorial board provides one of the following recommendations:
| Accept | The work is scientifically sound and meets all publication standards. |
| Minor Revision | The work is promising but requires small clarifications or technical edits. |
| Major Revision | Significant reworking or additional data verification is required. |
| Reject | The manuscript contains fundamental flaws or falls outside the journal's scope. |
Final Publication Authority
While peer reviewers provide vital expertise, the final decision regarding publication rests exclusively with the Editor-in-Chief. This authority ensures that the journal maintains a consistent standard of excellence and adheres to all international scholarly publishing regulations.
