Peer Review Policy

Annals of Clinical and Medical Research (ACMR) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific quality, integrity, and transparency through a rigorous and unbiased peer review process.

The journal follows a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.

 

Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial office to determine:

  • suitability within the journal scope,
  • scientific relevance,
  • originality,
  • ethical compliance,
  • and adherence to submission guidelines.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s minimum standards may be returned to authors or rejected without external peer review.

 

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts passing the initial editorial screening are forwarded for independent double-blind peer review.

Under this process:

  • reviewers do not know the identities of authors,
  • authors do not know the identities of reviewers.

This system is intended to ensure fairness, objectivity, and unbiased scientific evaluation.

 

Reviewer Evaluation

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.

Reviewers are requested to evaluate:

  • scientific originality,
  • methodological quality,
  • clinical or academic relevance,
  • ethical compliance,
  • clarity of presentation,
  • validity of results,
  • and appropriateness of references.

Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations to assist both authors and editors.

 

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment, manuscripts may receive one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Authors may be requested to revise their manuscript and respond to reviewer comments before a final decision is made.

The Editor-in-Chief holds the final authority regarding acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.

 

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to ACMR are treated as confidential documents.

Editors and reviewers must not:

  • disclose manuscript information,
  • share unpublished content,
  • or use submitted materials for personal or professional advantage.

 

Ethical Standards in Peer Review

Reviewers and editors are expected to:

  • maintain confidentiality,
  • declare conflicts of interest,
  • provide objective evaluations,
  • avoid personal criticism,
  • and report suspected ethical misconduct or plagiarism.

The journal follows COPE recommendations and international best practices in handling peer review ethics and publication misconduct.

 

Peer Review Timeline

ACMR aims to provide timely editorial decisions. However, review duration may vary depending on:

  • reviewer availability,
  • manuscript complexity,
  • and revision requirements.

The editorial office continuously works to maintain an efficient and transparent review process.

 

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based solely on:

  • scientific merit,
  • originality,
  • methodological rigor,
  • ethical standards,
  • and relevance to the journal scope.

Publication decisions are entirely independent of financial considerations, institutional influence, or commercial interests.