Reviewers policies

Reviewer Selection

The e-Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Science (EJMPS) appoints qualified reviewers based on their academic expertise, research experience, publication background, and subject specialization relevant to the submitted manuscript. Reviewers are selected to ensure a fair, unbiased, and high-quality evaluation of scholarly work.

 

Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal follows a strict double-blind peer review process in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. This system helps maintain impartiality, objectivity, and transparency in manuscript evaluation.

 

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to critically evaluate the originality, scientific quality, methodology, ethical compliance, relevance, clarity, and overall contribution of the manuscript. They should provide constructive comments that help authors improve the quality of their work and assist editors in making appropriate publication decisions.

 

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal, academic, or professional advantage. Confidentiality must be maintained before, during, and after the review process.

 

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript, including personal, institutional, financial, or academic relationships that may affect their judgment. In such cases, reviewers should decline the review invitation to maintain transparency and ethical standards.

 

Ethical Misconduct Reporting

If reviewers identify plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, ethical concerns, authorship issues, or any form of research misconduct, they are expected to immediately inform the editorial office with proper supporting observations. The journal treats such concerns seriously and investigates them according to publication ethics guidelines.

 

Timely Review Process

Reviewers are requested to complete the peer review within the specified review deadline to ensure a smooth and timely publication process. If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the given timeframe, they should inform the editorial office promptly so that alternative arrangements can be made.

 

Recommendation to Editors

After completing the evaluation, reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, resubmission, or rejection of the manuscript. Final publication decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment.

 

Recognition and Appreciation

The journal highly values the contribution of reviewers in maintaining academic quality and publication integrity. Reviewers may receive acknowledgment, certificates of reviewing, or official appreciation from the journal for their valuable academic service.