Peer Review Process

Review Process

  1. Peer Review Process:
  • BMCJ abides by a double-blind peer review process.
  • The journal does not disclose the identity of the reviewer(s) to the author(s) and vice versa.
  1. Manuscript Submission:
  • Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.
  1. Initial Editorial Evaluation:
  • The editorial team conducts an initial evaluation to assess the manuscript's suitability for the journal.
  1. Assignment of Reviewers:
  • The editorial team assigns qualified reviewers to evaluate the manuscript.
  1. Double-Blind Review:
  • Reviewers evaluate the manuscript without knowing the identity of the authors.
  • Authors are also unaware of the identity of the reviewers.
  1. Peer Review Evaluation:
  • Reviewers assess the manuscript based on scientific quality, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope.
  1. Editorial Decision:
  • Based on the reviewers' comments, the editorial team decides to accept, reject, or request revisions to the manuscript.
  1. Author Revisions:
  • If revisions are requested, authors can revise their manuscript based on the reviewers' comments.
  1. Re-review (if necessary):
  • Revised manuscripts may undergo further review by the original reviewers or additional reviewers.
  1. Final Editorial Decision:
  • The editorial team makes a final decision on the acceptance of the manuscript based on the revisions and reviewer feedback.
  1. Publication:
  • Accepted manuscripts are scheduled for publication in the journal.
  1. Anonymity Preserved:
  • Throughout the review process, the anonymity of both authors and reviewers is preserved.
  1. Author Notification:
  • Authors are notified of the editorial decision, including any revisions required for acceptance.
  1. Ethical Considerations:
  • The journal adheres to ethical standards and guidelines to ensure the integrity and validity of the review process.