Peer Review Policy
| Post date: 2024/11/16 |
Ethical Standards and Peer Review Process
The “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences”, a publication of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. We follow a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure impartial evaluation of all submitted manuscripts. Our practices are fully aligned with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines and the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.
Peer Review Process
The decision to publish a manuscript in the “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences” is based on editorial evaluation and a thorough peer review process.
Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to determine their alignment with the journal’s scope, quality standards, and relevance. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they fail to meet the journal’s criteria for novelty, significance, or quality. Editorials and letters may be accepted without peer review, but most manuscripts will proceed to the next stage of review.
If further revisions are needed prior to peer review, authors will be invited to make the necessary changes. Manuscripts will typically be rejected or returned for revision within 1–2 weeks of submission.
Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are sent for double-blind peer review, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. The peer review process is managed by the journal’s section editors, under the supervision of the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection.
The typical duration of the peer review process is 4 weeks, though authors should allow up to 6 weeks to account for unforeseen delays.
Role of Reviewers
Reviewers play a critical role in ensuring the quality and integrity of the journal. In the double-blind review process, reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality and must not disclose their identity at any point.
Reviewers should only accept manuscripts within their area of expertise and should ensure they can dedicate sufficient time to conduct a thorough evaluation. If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers must immediately recuse themselves from the review process. If a reviewer determines that the manuscript is technically or methodologically flawed or cannot be reviewed within the required timeframe, they should decline the invitation.
Reviewers are responsible for evaluating the manuscript’s originality, quality, and validity, ensuring the following:
- Compliance with the journal’s structure and formatting guidelines
- Clear articulation of the paper’s objectives and purpose
- Appropriateness of the methodology
- Relevance and accuracy of references
- Grammar, punctuation, and spelling
- Identification of any potential plagiarism
Reviewers should provide constructive, unbiased feedback and recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. Reviewers must not share the manuscript with others or make copies for personal use.
As a reviewer, your role is essential in maintaining the quality and scientific integrity of the journal. Reviewers are expected to provide clear, constructive feedback that helps improve the manuscript while respecting the author’s work. Your review will guide the editorial team in making a final decision about publication.
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts are confidential documents and should not be shared or discussed outside the review process.
- Objectivity: Reviews should be unbiased, evidence-based, and focused solely on the scientific content of the manuscript. If a manuscript falls outside your area of expertise, you should decline the invitation.
- Constructive Feedback: Provide actionable feedback aimed at improving the manuscript’s quality, without damaging the author's work.
- Timeliness: Reviews should be completed within the allotted time, typically 4 weeks, to avoid unnecessary delays for authors.
Privacy and Confidentiality
In accordance with the ICMJE Recommendations, confidentiality is of utmost importance throughout the peer review process. Authors submit their manuscripts with the understanding that their work will be handled confidentially. Reviewers and editors are equally bound by confidentiality obligations.
Confidentiality Obligations
- Reviewers must not share or discuss the manuscript with anyone outside the review process unless given explicit permission by the editor.
- Editors must maintain confidentiality about all submitted manuscripts, including information regarding their receipt, status, and peer review comments.
- Reviewers should return or destroy manuscript copies once the review is complete.
If misconduct, fraud, or any ethical violations are suspected during the review process, the editor may breach confidentiality to investigate the issue.
COPE and ICMJE Guidelines for Authors, Reviewers and Editors
The Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences strictly adheres to the ethical principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) throughout the manuscript review and publication process. For more detailed information, please visit the COPE Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
In addition, the journal follows the international guidelines for Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors, as well as the ethical standards for editors, as outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These guidelines ensure that all published work meets the highest ethical, scientific, and professional standards.
Conflict of Interest in the Peer Review Process
Despite the double-blind review process, conflicts of interest may still arise, particularly in smaller academic fields. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their assessment of a manuscript. If a reviewer’s personal or professional relationship with an author may bias their evaluation, they should recuse themselves from the review process.
If unethical behavior, such as plagiarism or duplicate publication, is suspected, reviewers are encouraged to inform the editorial office immediately.
Final Remarks
At the “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences”, we are committed to providing a transparent, ethical publishing process that upholds the integrity of academic research. We encourage authors, reviewers, and editors to adhere to the guidelines set forth by COPE and ICMJE to ensure the publication of high-quality, reliable research.
For any questions or concerns regarding the peer review process or ethical guidelines, please contact the editorial office.
The “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences”, a publication of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. We follow a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure impartial evaluation of all submitted manuscripts. Our practices are fully aligned with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines and the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.
Peer Review Process
The decision to publish a manuscript in the “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences” is based on editorial evaluation and a thorough peer review process.
Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to determine their alignment with the journal’s scope, quality standards, and relevance. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they fail to meet the journal’s criteria for novelty, significance, or quality. Editorials and letters may be accepted without peer review, but most manuscripts will proceed to the next stage of review.
If further revisions are needed prior to peer review, authors will be invited to make the necessary changes. Manuscripts will typically be rejected or returned for revision within 1–2 weeks of submission.
Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are sent for double-blind peer review, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. The peer review process is managed by the journal’s section editors, under the supervision of the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection.
The typical duration of the peer review process is 4 weeks, though authors should allow up to 6 weeks to account for unforeseen delays.
Role of Reviewers
Reviewers play a critical role in ensuring the quality and integrity of the journal. In the double-blind review process, reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality and must not disclose their identity at any point.
Reviewers should only accept manuscripts within their area of expertise and should ensure they can dedicate sufficient time to conduct a thorough evaluation. If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers must immediately recuse themselves from the review process. If a reviewer determines that the manuscript is technically or methodologically flawed or cannot be reviewed within the required timeframe, they should decline the invitation.
Reviewers are responsible for evaluating the manuscript’s originality, quality, and validity, ensuring the following:
- Compliance with the journal’s structure and formatting guidelines
- Clear articulation of the paper’s objectives and purpose
- Appropriateness of the methodology
- Relevance and accuracy of references
- Grammar, punctuation, and spelling
- Identification of any potential plagiarism
Reviewers should provide constructive, unbiased feedback and recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. Reviewers must not share the manuscript with others or make copies for personal use.
Guidelines for Reviewers
As a reviewer, your role is essential in maintaining the quality and scientific integrity of the journal. Reviewers are expected to provide clear, constructive feedback that helps improve the manuscript while respecting the author’s work. Your review will guide the editorial team in making a final decision about publication.
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts are confidential documents and should not be shared or discussed outside the review process.
- Objectivity: Reviews should be unbiased, evidence-based, and focused solely on the scientific content of the manuscript. If a manuscript falls outside your area of expertise, you should decline the invitation.
- Constructive Feedback: Provide actionable feedback aimed at improving the manuscript’s quality, without damaging the author's work.
- Timeliness: Reviews should be completed within the allotted time, typically 4 weeks, to avoid unnecessary delays for authors.
Privacy and Confidentiality
In accordance with the ICMJE Recommendations, confidentiality is of utmost importance throughout the peer review process. Authors submit their manuscripts with the understanding that their work will be handled confidentially. Reviewers and editors are equally bound by confidentiality obligations.
Confidentiality Obligations
- Reviewers must not share or discuss the manuscript with anyone outside the review process unless given explicit permission by the editor.
- Editors must maintain confidentiality about all submitted manuscripts, including information regarding their receipt, status, and peer review comments.
- Reviewers should return or destroy manuscript copies once the review is complete.
If misconduct, fraud, or any ethical violations are suspected during the review process, the editor may breach confidentiality to investigate the issue.
COPE and ICMJE Guidelines for Authors, Reviewers and Editors
The Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences strictly adheres to the ethical principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) throughout the manuscript review and publication process. For more detailed information, please visit the COPE Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
In addition, the journal follows the international guidelines for Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors, as well as the ethical standards for editors, as outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These guidelines ensure that all published work meets the highest ethical, scientific, and professional standards.
Conflict of Interest in the Peer Review Process
Despite the double-blind review process, conflicts of interest may still arise, particularly in smaller academic fields. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their assessment of a manuscript. If a reviewer’s personal or professional relationship with an author may bias their evaluation, they should recuse themselves from the review process.
If unethical behavior, such as plagiarism or duplicate publication, is suspected, reviewers are encouraged to inform the editorial office immediately.
Final Remarks
At the “Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences”, we are committed to providing a transparent, ethical publishing process that upholds the integrity of academic research. We encourage authors, reviewers, and editors to adhere to the guidelines set forth by COPE and ICMJE to ensure the publication of high-quality, reliable research.
For any questions or concerns regarding the peer review process or ethical guidelines, please contact the editorial office.
View: 16342 Time(s) | Print: 566 Time(s) | Email: 0 Time(s) |
0 Comment(s)
Articles Copyright © The Author(s). Owned by Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences.
Contact Us
Address: Journal Office, Building No. 2, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Moallem Square, Sari.Tel: +98 (011)34484874 Postal code: 48175-866 E-Mail: jmums@mazums.ac.ir Telefax: +98 (011)33262679
