PEER REVIEW POLICY

JMMHR follows the core principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and internationally recognized standards for responsible medical, health, and multidisciplinary scholarly publishing.

Overview

The Journal of Medical and Multidisciplinary Healthcare Research (JMMHR) applies a structured peer-review process to promote scientific quality, methodological soundness, clinical and healthcare relevance, originality, and ethical integrity across the diverse disciplines represented within the journal.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or an appropriately designated member of the Editorial Team. This assessment considers the manuscript's relevance to the scope of JMMHR, scientific quality, originality, reporting standards, ethical requirements, methodological adequacy, and compliance with journal policies. Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope, contain serious methodological deficiencies, present unresolved ethical concerns, or fail to meet essential submission requirements may be declined before external peer review. Where appropriate, authors may instead be invited to correct technical, reporting, or formatting deficiencies before the manuscript proceeds to review.

Peer Review at a Glance

Item JMMHR Policy
Peer Review Type Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewers Normally at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise
Final Decision Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated independent editor
Revision Rounds Minor or Major Revision, with further review when necessary
Conflict of Interest Disclosure required from authors, reviewers, editors, and Guest Editors where applicable
Ethical Standards COPE Core Practices and applicable ICMJE recommendations
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Reviewers must protect confidential manuscript information and must not upload confidential manuscript content to generative AI or third-party systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.
Confidentiality Maintained throughout editorial screening, peer review, revision, and final decision-making.

Peer Review Model

JMMHR utilizes a structured Double-Blind Peer Review System:

✓ Author identities are concealed from external reviewers.
✓ Reviewer identities are concealed from authors.
✓ Manuscripts are appropriately anonymized before external peer review.

* Editorial decisions are based on scholarly, scientific, methodological, and ethical considerations and are not influenced by nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, academic seniority, or personal relationships.

Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are normally assigned to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise relevant to the submitted work. Depending on the manuscript, reviewers may be selected from fields including medicine, nursing, allied health sciences, public health, biomedical sciences, clinical research, healthcare management, laboratory sciences, rehabilitation, or other related disciplines.

Reviewers are selected with consideration of:

  • • Relevant subject expertise and scholarly experience.
  • • Appropriate research and publication experience in the relevant field.
  • • Absence of significant personal, professional, institutional, academic, or financial conflicts of interest.
  • • Ability to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and timely feedback.

The Editorial Office may appoint additional reviewers, statistical reviewers, methodological specialists, or subject experts when the nature of a manuscript requires additional assessment.

Review Criteria

  • ✓ Originality and contribution to medical or healthcare knowledge
  • ✓ Scientific and methodological rigor
  • ✓ Reliability and reproducibility where applicable
  • ✓ Appropriateness of statistical analysis and interpretation
  • ✓ Compliance with relevant research ethics and participant-safety requirements
  • ✓ Clarity, completeness, and transparency of reporting
  • ✓ Relevance to the multidisciplinary scope of JMMHR
  • ✓ Appropriate engagement with relevant scientific literature
  • ✓ Potential contribution to healthcare practice, policy, education, or future research where applicable

Editorial Decisions

Following editorial assessment and peer review, manuscripts may receive one of the following decisions:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

Where substantial revisions are requested, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by additional experts. The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editor retains final responsibility for the publication decision.

Reviewer Responsibilities & AI Policy

  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process.
  • Provide objective, respectful, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or notify the Editorial Office promptly if additional time is required.
  • Declare actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest before accepting a review.
  • Identify concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, unethical research, or other research-integrity concerns.
  • Never use confidential or unpublished information obtained during peer review for personal, academic, professional, or commercial benefit.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy: Reviewers must not upload, paste, transfer, or otherwise disclose confidential manuscript material to generative AI tools or third-party automated systems unless expressly authorized by JMMHR and appropriate confidentiality safeguards are available. Reviewers remain responsible for the confidentiality, accuracy, and integrity of their reports. AI-assisted tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly assessment.

Editorial Responsibilities & Governance

Editors are responsible for maintaining a fair, impartial, confidential, and scientifically rigorous peer-review process. This includes selecting suitable reviewers, managing competing interests, protecting confidential information, evaluating ethical concerns, and making publication decisions based on the scientific and scholarly merits of submitted manuscripts. JMMHR applies recognized publication-ethics principles when addressing research misconduct, corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, appeals, and complaints.

Editorial Independence: Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, or other individuals with relevant editorial conflicts shall be managed through an independent editorial arrangement. Individuals with a conflict shall not participate in reviewer selection, editorial deliberation, or the final publication decision concerning their own manuscript.

Confidentiality & Appeals Process

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, unpublished research information, and internal editorial records shall be treated as confidential. Access shall be limited to individuals directly involved in the editorial process or otherwise authorized by the journal.

Authors may submit a reasoned and evidence-based appeal when they believe that a substantive scientific or procedural error has affected an editorial decision. Appeals should clearly identify the grounds for reconsideration and provide relevant supporting information. Where reasonably possible, an appeal shall be assessed by an editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision. The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editorial authority shall make the final determination following appropriate consideration of the appeal.