Peer-Review Policy

The International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health (IJMSPH) employs a rigorous, double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scientific merit of all submitted articles.

---

1. Peer-Review Assignment

• Manuscripts that pass initial editorial checks are sent for review to a minimum of two independent experts in the relevant field.
• IJMSPH follows a double-blind peer-review system, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to minimize bias and promote impartial evaluation.
• Reviewer comments are confidential and disclosed only with the reviewer’s explicit consent.

---

2. Characteristics of the Peer-Review Process

• All research articles are evaluated by at least two qualified experts.
• Reviewers are typically given 21 days to complete their assessments.
• If a reviewer does not respond within the stipulated timeframe, the invitation is withdrawn, and an alternative reviewer is invited.

---

3. Communication with Corresponding Author

• The corresponding author is notified via email when reviewer comments are submitted.
• Editors review the feedback and communicate it to the corresponding author, with or without additional editorial remarks.
• Authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript addressing all reviewer and editorial comments within three weeks.
• Failure to submit revisions within this timeframe may result in rejection of the manuscript and removal of its metadata from the system.

---

4. Revised Manuscripts

• Revised manuscripts may be sent to the original reviewers for reassessment if deemed necessary by the Editor-in-Chief or editorial board.

---

5. Publication Decision

• The final decision on publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editorial board member, based on reviewer assessments and editorial evaluation.

---

6. Timeline

• Under normal circumstances, the peer-review and revision process takes approximately 6–8 weeks from initial submission to final decision.

---

This policy ensures transparency, fairness, and academic rigor in the evaluation of all submitted work while maintaining confidentiality and integrity in the peer-review process.