Peer Review Process
IJMSHI follows a rigorous double‑blind peer review model to ensure fairness, quality, and integrity in every published article.
Double‑Blind Peer Review
IJMSHI employs a double‑blind peer review system, in which the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This eliminates potential bias based on author reputation, institution, or geography, and ensures that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific merit.
The Review Workflow
Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, the editorial office checks the manuscript for scope, formatting compliance, and completeness. Plagiarism screening is performed using iThenticate/Turnitin. Manuscripts with >10% similarity (excluding references) or those out of scope are desk‑rejected within 3–5 working days.
Assignment to Handling Editor
Manuscripts that pass initial screening are assigned to a Handling Editor (usually an Associate Editor) with relevant expertise. The Handling Editor assesses the manuscript's novelty and scientific rigor and decides whether to proceed with external review.
Reviewer Invitation & Assignment
The Handling Editor invites at least two independent expert reviewers from the journal's database or external sources. Reviewers are given 2–3 weeks to complete their evaluation. If a reviewer declines or is unresponsive, alternatives are promptly sought.
Review & Evaluation
Reviewers assess the manuscript based on originality, methodology, data validity, interpretation, and relevance. They provide detailed comments and a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. The review form also includes confidential comments to the editor.
Editorial Decision & Revision
Based on reviewer comments and their own assessment, the Handling Editor makes a decision. Authors receive a decision letter with reviewer reports (anonymized). Revised manuscripts must be resubmitted within 2–4 weeks for minor revisions or 4–6 weeks for major revisions, accompanied by a point‑by‑point response.
Final Decision & Publication
Revised manuscripts may undergo further review by the same or new reviewers. Once accepted, the manuscript moves to production for copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading. The final galley proof is sent to the corresponding author for approval before online publication with DOI assignment.
Guidelines for Reviewers
- Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest and decline if they feel unable to provide an impartial review.
- Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents; sharing or using data is strictly prohibited.
- Reviews should be constructive, specific, and supported by evidence. Personal criticism is unacceptable.
- Reviewers are expected to submit their reports within the agreed timeframe (typically 14 days).
- Reviewers should alert the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical concerns.
Ethical Oversight
IJMSHI adheres to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and expects all participants in the review process—authors, reviewers, and editors—to uphold the highest ethical standards. Any allegations of misconduct are investigated promptly. For detailed policies, please refer to our Editorial Policy and Ethics Policy pages.