Peer Review Policy
After an initial assessment by the editor to determine if the submission falls within the journal's scope, along with a plagiarism check, selected papers are reviewed internally by the editorial team. If they fulfill all the components and adhere to the journal's policies and guidelines, they are then sent to two external peer reviewers who are experts in the relevant field, as identified by the Editor.
The journal follows double blind peer-review procedure. An average of two weeks' time is given to reviewers for reviewing the manuscript. The identity of both the reviewer and author is kept hidden. All incoming manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editorial Team initially evaluates all submitted manuscripts to ensure completeness. Manuscripts are rejected at this stage if they lack originality, have significant scientific flaws, contain poor grammar or English, or fall outside the journal's aims and scope. Manuscripts meeting the minimum criteria are forwarded to two relevant external reviewers, typically one national and one international. Based on their evaluations, the manuscript is either returned to the authors for revisions or rejected if the reviewers are not satisfied. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the same reviewers for a second round of review to verify the changes or assessed by the editorial team to confirm that the reviewers' suggestions have been incorporated. The final decision lies with the editorial team.
The preliminary assessment of manuscripts typically takes around 2-3 weeks. The peer review process usually takes an additional 3-4 weeks. From the time of submission to publication, the entire process averages 12-14 weeks, depending on the extent of revisions suggested by the reviewers and the editorial team.
Type of peer review
JUCMD employs double blind reviewing, in which the reviewer remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the review process, whilst the identity of the author(s) is likewise unknown to the reviewers. Reviewers are requested to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original as to thought and method (including data)
- Is methodologically sound
- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly and exhaustively references previous relevant work
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially as concerns plagiarism
- Clearly adds to the knowledge and development of the field
Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but reviewers are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style to the manuscript. In rare cases, the manuscript may be returned to the author(s) for a full linguistic and stylistic revision. The chief editor's decision is final.
The whole process from submission to acceptance of the manuscript takes around 12-14 weeks on average.
