Peer-Reviewed Journal
Multidisciplinary Research
STEM • Medical • Humanities
IMJSMH Logo

International Multidisciplinary Journal of
STEM, Medicine and Humanities

Peer-Reviewed & Open AccessISSN: .....
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Peer Review Process

Ensuring excellence through rigorous double-blind peer review

Double-Blind

Review Type

2 Minimum

Reviewers

3-4 Weeks

Duration

Guaranteed

Fair & Unbiased

Our Review Policy

IMJSMH follows a strict double-blind peer-review process. Manuscripts are evaluated for originality, relevance, methodology, and ethical standards to ensure the quality, validity, and significance of all published research.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share or discuss manuscripts with others.

Objectivity

Reviews are based on scientific merit without personal bias toward authors or their institutions.

Constructiveness

Reviewers provide constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts.

Timeliness

Reviewers complete reviews within agreed timeframe to ensure prompt publication.

Review Process Steps

Step 01 2-3 Days
Initial Screening

Editorial team checks for scope, quality, and plagiarism

Step 02 1-2 Days
Reviewer Selection

Editors invite experts with relevant expertise

Step 03 3-4 Weeks
Peer Review

Independent reviewers evaluate methodology, results, and conclusions

Step 04 2-3 Days
Review Discussion

Editors consolidate reviewer feedback and make recommendations

Step 05 1-2 Days
Editorial Decision

Accept, minor/major revision, or reject

Editorial Decisions

~15%
Accept

Manuscript meets all quality standards and is ready for publication

~40%
Minor Revision

Good quality but needs small changes. Quick turnaround expected.

~25%
Major Revision

Significant issues that require substantial revisions and re-review.

~20%
Reject

Does not meet quality standards or outside journal scope.

Evaluation Criteria

Scientific Quality
  • Originality and novelty
  • Methodology appropriateness
  • Data analysis quality
  • Statistical validity
Presentation
  • Clarity of writing
  • Logical organization
  • Figure and table quality
  • Reference accuracy
Significance
  • Contribution to field
  • Practical implications
  • Relevance to audience
  • Impact potential
Ethics
  • Ethical approval compliance
  • Data availability
  • Conflict of interest
  • Plagiarism check

Become a Reviewer

Join our panel of expert reviewers and contribute to maintaining research quality

Join as Reviewer