Review Policy

At Journal of Clinical Medical Research (JCMR), we are dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly integrity and excellence in the dissemination of medical research. Our peer-review process serves as a cornerstone in ensuring the quality, validity, and impact of the research we publish. Here’s a comprehensive overview of the key features and steps involved in our peer-review process:

Peer-review assignment

• Upon submission, manuscripts undergo meticulous scrutiny to ensure compliance with submission guidelines and ethical standards.
• Following initial checks, manuscripts are assigned to a minimum of two independent experts in the relevant field for peer review.
• Our peer-review process adheres to a single-blind model, where reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but authors remain unaware of the reviewers’ identities to maintain objectivity and fairness.
• All peer-review comments are treated with utmost confidentiality and are disclosed only with the explicit consent of the reviewers, fostering trust and integrity in the review process.

Characteristics of the peer-review process

• Each research article submitted to JCMR undergoes thorough evaluation by at least two qualified experts, ensuring comprehensive assessment from diverse perspectives.
• Reviewers are provided with a standard timeframe of 21 days to complete their assessments, promoting timely feedback and efficient manuscript handling.
• In cases where reviewers fail to respond within the stipulated timeframe, the manuscript invitation is promptly withdrawn, and alternate reviewers are engaged to minimize delays and maintain the integrity of the review process.

Communication with corresponding author

• Upon submission of reviewers’ comments to JCMR, the corresponding author receives prompt notification via email, facilitating transparent communication and collaboration.
• The Editor-in-Chief or assigned Editor meticulously reviews and conveys the reviewers’ comments to the corresponding author, offering additional insights and guidance as needed to facilitate manuscript revision.
• The corresponding author is entrusted with the responsibility to diligently address both editorial and reviewer comments and submit the revised manuscript within three weeks, ensuring prompt and effective response to feedback.
• Failure to adhere to the revision deadline may result in the manuscript being considered rejected, underscoring the importance of timely and proactive engagement in the revision process to expedite publication timelines.

Revised manuscripts

Revised manuscripts, if deemed necessary, may undergo reevaluation by the original reviewers to ensure that all concerns and suggestions have been adequately addressed, promoting thoroughness and completeness in the peer-review process.

Publication decision

The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate editorial board member, informed by the comprehensive reviews provided by the expert reviewers. This ensures that only scientifically rigorous and ethically sound research is accepted for publication in JCMR.

Timeline

From submission to final decision, the peer-review process typically spans between 6 to 8 weeks, allowing for comprehensive evaluation while maintaining efficient turnaround times. This timeframe strikes a balance between thoroughness and expediency, facilitating timely dissemination of valuable research findings to the scientific community.