Peer Review Policy
Double-Blind Peer Review System
International Medical Journal of Health (IMJH) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic quality and integrity.
Policy Navigation
1. Review System Overview
Double-Blind Peer Review
IMJH uses a double-blind peer review system where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process. This ensures impartial and unbiased evaluation of manuscripts.
Key Features
Quality Assurance
2. Review Process
Step-by-Step Review Workflow
Step 1: Initial Screening
Editorial office checks manuscript for compliance with journal guidelines, formatting, and plagiarism screening (within 24-48 hours).
Step 2: Editor Assignment
Editor-in-chief or handling editor assigns manuscript to appropriate section editor based on subject area.
Step 3: Reviewer Selection
Section editor selects 2-3 qualified reviewers from database based on expertise and availability.
Step 4: Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate manuscript independently using standardized criteria (5-7 days).
Step 5: Decision
Editor makes decision based on reviewer recommendations and own assessment.
Step 6: Communication
Decision communicated to author with reviewer comments (if applicable).
3. Review Criteria
Standardized Evaluation Framework
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts using a standardized set of criteria to ensure consistency and fairness.
Scientific Quality
Presentation Quality
Ethical Considerations
Research Ethics
Publication Ethics
Statistical Ethics
4. Review Timeline
Standard Review Timeline
| Stage | Duration | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Screening | 24-48 hours | Format check, plagiarism screening |
| Reviewer Assignment | 1-2 days | Finding suitable reviewers |
| Peer Review | 5-7 days | Review period for each reviewer |
| Editorial Decision | 1 day | Decision based on reviews |
| Total Time to First Decision | 7-10 days | From submission to decision |
Factors Affecting Timeline
- Reviewer availability: Peak periods may cause delays
- Manuscript complexity: Complex studies require more review time
- Revision rounds: Manuscripts requiring revisions take longer
- Holiday periods: Slower processing during holidays
- Complete submissions: Manuscripts with all required documents processed faster
5. Reviewer Selection
Selection Criteria
Reviewer Database
Become a Reviewer
Qualified researchers interested in joining our reviewer panel can apply through our Become a Reviewer page. Reviewers receive certificates of appreciation and may be considered for editorial board positions.
6. Confidentiality
Confidentiality Policy
IMJH maintains strict confidentiality throughout the peer review process to protect authors' intellectual property and ensure unbiased evaluation.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Editorial Responsibilities
7. Review Ethics
Ethical Standards for Reviewers
All reviewers must adhere to COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Prohibited Practices
Expected Standards
Reviewer Recognition
Certificate
Annual certificate of appreciation
Board Consideration
Eligible for editorial board positions
Benefits
Waiver on future publications
8. Appeal Process
Appeal Guidelines
Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe there has been an error in the review process or decision-making.
Grounds for Appeal
Appeal Process
Submitting an Appeal
Appeals should be submitted via email to info@imjhealth.org with subject line "Appeal: [Manuscript ID]". Include manuscript ID, decision date, and detailed explanation of appeal grounds.
Quality Assurance
Commitment to Excellence
Our peer review process is designed to maintain the highest standards of scientific quality, fairness, and integrity. We continuously monitor and improve our review system based on feedback from authors and reviewers.