Reviewers policies

The publication of manuscripts in the Global Journal of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences (GJMPS) is based on a rigorous editorial assessment and peer review process designed to ensure scientific quality, originality, integrity, and academic relevance.

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening by members of the editorial office to determine:

  • suitability to the journal scope

  • originality

  • scientific quality

  • ethical compliance

  • adherence to author guidelines

The purpose of this initial evaluation is to provide authors with a timely decision when a manuscript clearly does not meet the journal’s publication standards.

Manuscripts that do not demonstrate sufficient originality, scientific rigor, ethical compliance, or relevance to the journal scope may be rejected during the preliminary editorial assessment. In some cases, authors may be requested to revise formatting or technical issues before the manuscript proceeds to peer review.

Authors can generally expect an initial editorial decision within one to two weeks of submission.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are forwarded for external peer review.

GJMPS follows a double-blind peer review process, in which:

  • reviewers remain anonymous to authors

  • authors remain anonymous to reviewers

Each manuscript is typically evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject area of the submission. The peer review process is supervised by the Section Editor and the Editor-in-Chief.

Authors are responsible for removing identifying information from the manuscript to ensure anonymity during peer review. If author-identifying information remains in the manuscript, the review process may proceed in a single-blind format at the discretion of the editorial office.

The journal strives to complete the peer review process within four weeks after a manuscript enters review, although review timelines may occasionally vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

The Editor-in-Chief holds full authority regarding the final editorial decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts.

Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of the journal.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations

  • maintain confidentiality of submitted manuscripts

  • evaluate originality, scientific quality, and ethical standards

  • identify methodological concerns or ethical issues

  • disclose conflicts of interest

  • complete reviews within the requested timeframe

Reviewers should immediately decline review invitations if:

  • the manuscript falls outside their expertise

  • they are unable to complete the review on time

  • conflicts of interest exist

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential documents. Reviewers must not share manuscripts, discuss unpublished findings, or transfer review responsibilities to colleagues without prior editorial approval.

Reviewers may recommend:

  • acceptance

  • minor revision

  • major revision

  • rejection

Reviewer recommendations are carefully considered during the editorial decision-making process.

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are generally asked to assess manuscripts based on:

  • originality and novelty

  • scientific quality and rigor

  • clarity of objectives

  • methodology and study design

  • validity of results and conclusions

  • organization and structure

  • language quality and readability

  • adequacy of references

  • ethical compliance

  • relevance to the journal scope

Reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed and constructive comments that help improve the quality of the manuscript.

Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity, quality, and ethical standards of the journal.

Editors are expected to:

  • ensure fair and unbiased editorial decisions

  • maintain confidentiality during the review process

  • avoid conflicts of interest

  • evaluate manuscripts solely on academic merit

  • ensure ethical publication practices

  • address allegations of misconduct appropriately

Editorial decisions are based on:

  • scientific importance

  • originality

  • methodological quality

  • ethical compliance

  • relevance to the journal scope

Editors may reject manuscripts that:

  • fail to meet scientific standards

  • contain plagiarism or misconduct

  • violate ethical principles

  • fall outside the journal scope

Editors are committed to ensuring prompt processing of manuscripts and timely communication with authors.

Confidentiality Policy

Confidentiality is essential throughout the publication process.

Editors and reviewers must not:

  • disclose manuscript information to unauthorized individuals

  • discuss unpublished content publicly

  • use confidential information for personal or professional advantage

Reviewer identities and review comments remain confidential unless disclosure is required under journal policy or approved by the reviewer.

Confidentiality may only be breached in cases involving suspected misconduct, ethical violations, or legal obligations.

Research Integrity and Ethical Standards

GJMPS is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and publication ethics.

The journal strictly prohibits:

  • plagiarism

  • duplicate publication

  • data fabrication

  • data falsification

  • unethical experimentation

  • image manipulation

  • citation manipulation

Manuscripts may undergo plagiarism screening before peer review.

Where concerns regarding misconduct arise, the journal may take appropriate corrective actions, including:

  • rejection of manuscripts

  • publication corrections

  • retractions

  • editorial expressions of concern

  • notification to institutions or funding bodies where necessary

Timeliness and Editorial Efficiency

The journal is committed to ensuring efficient and timely processing of manuscripts.

If a manuscript is not suitable for publication, authors will be informed as early as possible to avoid unnecessary delays and allow submission elsewhere.

Editors continually monitor the review process to maintain publication quality while minimizing delays in editorial decision-making.