Peer Review Policy

1. Initial Screening (3–5 days)
   1.All submissions are first assessed by the editorial office for compliance with the journal’s scope, formatting, originality, and ethical standards.
   2.Manuscripts not meeting minimum criteria may be desk-rejected without external review.

2. Reviewer Assignment (within 2–4 days)
   1.Suitable manuscripts are assigned to two independent experts in the relevant field.
   2.Reviewers evaluate originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, contribution to the discipline, and overall quality.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review (10–20 days)

   Reviewers provide structured, constructive feedback on strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations for improvement.

4. Editorial Decision (within 3–5 days after reviews)

   Based on reviewer comments, the handling editor issues one of the following decisions:
     1.Accept
     2.Minor Revision
     3.Major Revision
     4.Reject

5. Post-Acceptance Processing (30–60 days)

    Accepted manuscripts undergo technical checks, copyediting, typesetting, DOI assignment, and online publication.

1. Originality & Integrity: Submit original work, free from plagiarism or duplicate submission. Proper citations are mandatory.

2. Revisions & Response: Address reviewer feedback constructively and submit a detailed point-by-point response with revised manuscripts.

3. Conflict of Interest (COI): Disclose all financial, institutional, or personal relationships that may influence the research.

1. Objectivity: Provide fair, evidence-based, and constructive evaluations.

2. Confidentiality: Treat manuscripts as confidential and never use content for personal benefit.

3. Timeliness: Complete reviews within the agreed timeline (10–20 days). If delayed, notify the editor promptly.

4. Conflict of Interest: Decline review assignments where personal, financial, or academic conflicts exist.

1. Fair Decision-Making: Evaluate submissions solely on scholarly merit, without bias or discrimination.

2. Confidentiality: Maintain strict confidentiality during all review stages.

3. Ethical Oversight: Address plagiarism, duplicate submissions, fabricated data, or ethical misconduct promptly.

4. Plagiarism Screening: All manuscripts undergo similarity checks (Turnitin/iThenticate) before review.

1. Double-Blind Review (default): Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

2. Single-Blind Review (exceptional cases): Reviewers know author identities, but authors remain unaware of reviewers.

IJMCR adheres to COPE and ICMJE guidelines.

1. Authors: Must disclose funding, affiliations, or relationships that may influence the work.

2. Reviewers: Must recuse themselves in case of prior collaboration, institutional ties, or competitive interests.

3. Editors: Must not handle submissions where any conflict exists.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts based on:

1. Originality: Does the study add novel insights?

2. Clarity: Is the writing clear and well-structured?

3. Methodology: Are the methods valid, rigorous, and reproducible?

4. Contribution: Does the work advance the field?

5. References: Are citations recent, relevant, and sufficient?

Feedback should be respectful, balanced, and improvement-oriented.

Final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with associate editors and reviewers.

1. Accept: Manuscript meets journal standards.

2. Minor Revision: Small changes required before acceptance.

3. Major Revision: Substantial changes needed; re-review may be required.

4. Reject: Manuscript does not meet journal standards or scope.

IJMCR encourages scholarly dialogue beyond publication.

1. Readers may submit comments or critiques on published articles.
2. Authors are encouraged to respond constructively.
3. Corrections, retractions, or editorial notices will be issued when necessary to maintain the integrity of the recor

IJMCR follows international ethical publishing frameworks:

1. COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) – publicationethics.org
2. ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) – icmje.org

Cases of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or authorship disputes are formally investigated. Actions may include corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.