Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Medicor : Journal of Health Informatics and Health Policy employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process. Here's a detailed explanation:
- Initial Screening:
-
- Editor-in-Chief conducts preliminary evaluation
- Manuscripts checked for scope alignment and submission guideline adherence
- Non-compliant manuscripts promptly rejected
- External Review:
-
- Manuscripts passing initial screening assigned to handling editor
- Minimum two subject matter experts conduct double-blind review
- Additional reviewers engaged for significant discrepancies
- Decision Making:
-
- Outcomes: rejection, minor/major revision requests, acceptance, resubmission recommendation
- Editor-in-Chief makes final decision, considering handling editor recommendations and editorial board approval
- Revision Process:
-
- Authors have three weeks for revisions
- Handling editor reassesses revised manuscript
- Process may repeat if revisions are insufficient
- Final Decision:
-
- Based on manuscript meeting publication standards
- Manuscripts failing to meet quality benchmarks are rejected
- Quality Assurance:
-
- Process ensures high standards of academic quality and originality
- Editorial team and reviewers comprise international experts in health informatics and health policy
- Timeframe:
-
- Initial review typically completed within 4-6 weeks
- Entire process, including revisions, usually takes 2-3 months
- Transparency:
-
- Authors kept informed of manuscript status throughout process
- Detailed feedback provided to help authors improve their work
- Ethical Considerations:
-
- Reviewers required to declare conflicts of interest
- Confidentiality of review process strictly maintained
- Continuous Improvement:
- Regular evaluation of peer review process
- Feedback from authors and reviewers used to enhance system
This comprehensive peer review process ensures Medicor : Journal of Health Informatics and Health Policy maintains high standards of scientific rigor and relevance in its publications
