Peer Review Policy

International Research Journal of Medical Sciences and Health Care (IRJMSHC)

The International Research Journal of Medical Sciences and Health Care (IRJMSHC) is committed to ensuring the quality, integrity, and credibility of published research through a rigorous and transparent peer review process.

1. Type of Peer Review

• IRJMSHC employs a double-blind peer review system:

  • Authors’ identities are concealed from reviewers

  • Reviewers’ identities are concealed from authors

• This ensures unbiased and objective assessment.

2. Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo an initial editorial review to check for:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope

• Originality and novelty of research

• Compliance with submission guidelines

• Ethical standards and plagiarism checks

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.

3. Reviewer Selection

• Reviewers are selected based on subject-matter expertise

• Conflicts of interest are assessed, and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts

• The journal maintains a diverse pool of qualified reviewers from academia, healthcare, and clinical research

4. Review Process

• Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers

• Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to medical sciences and healthcare

  • Methodological rigor and accuracy of results

  • Clarity of presentation and reproducibility

  • Ethical compliance in research involving humans or animals

• Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations to the editor

5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the editor may decide to:

• Accept the manuscript

• Accept with minor revisions

• Request major revisions and resubmission

• Reject the manuscript

Editorial decisions are made independently of authors’ ability to pay any fees.

6. Revision and Re-Review

• Authors must respond to reviewer comments clearly and respectfully

• Revised manuscripts may be returned to original reviewers for further assessment

• Failure to address reviewer concerns may result in rejection

7. Confidentiality

• Manuscripts and reviews are treated as confidential

• Reviewers and editors must not share manuscript content or use it for personal gain

8. Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline assignments if impartiality is compromised

• Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts exist

9. Ethical Oversight

• IRJMSHC follows COPE guidelines for handling ethical issues

• Allegations of misconduct, bias, or unethical behavior are investigated thoroughly

10. Appeals and Complaints

• Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a justified request to the editorial office

• Complaints about the peer review process are handled fairly and transparently