Peer Review Policy
Peer review is the major quality keep measure for any academic journal. In this process, experts in the relevant fields, analyze the scholarly work from every perception, including its writing, the accuracy of its technical content, its documentation, and its impact on and implication to the discipline.
Reviewers play a pivotal role in scholarly publishing, and their valuable opinions certify the quality of the article under thoughtfulness. Peer review helps to approve research, establishing a standard for evaluation within research communities.
All manuscripts submitted for publication are strictly reviewed for their originality, methodology, importance, quality, ethical nature and suitability for the journal. International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research uses a well-constructed scheme for the evaluation process. The editor-in-chief has full authority over the editorial and scientific content of the International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research and the timing of publication of the content.
The whole editorial and peer review process can be divided into 15 successive steps:
- 1st review by the Editor-in-Chief: [immediate reject, immediate revision or further evaluation]
- 1st evaluation by Section Editor at the weekly Editorial Board Meeting
- 1st similarity check
- 2nd review by the Editor-in-Chief: [immediate reject, immediate revision or further evaluation]
- 1st review by two or more external reviewers
- 1st review by a Biostatistician
- Revisions (if needed)
- 2nd evaluation at the weekly Editorial Board Meeting
- 3rd review by the Editor-in-Chief [reject or revision]
- 2nd similarity re-check
- Copy editing
- Galley proof preparation
- Final review by the Editor-in-Chief
- 3rd similarity check