Editor Guidelines

At the American Journal of Biomedical Science and Research, the editors are considered the highest authority of publishing. To us, the word of our editors is considered final in the process of editing, peer reviewing and decisions regarding the publication of articles. Our editors are thorough examiners of scientific content and are responsible for the integrity of published articles and the quality of scientific research shared by this journal on a public platform.

Editor's Responsibilities

  • Editors are expected to determine whether the received articles fall under the scope of the journal and if said content meets the required standards set by the journal for publication.
  • Editors are also expected to thoroughly evaluate manuscripts and suggest modifications based on the content, it’s representation and the standards of online publishing.
  • Post the peer review process, content is sent to one of the editors. Their job is to then evaluate the literature, and suggest necessary changes to enhance the quality of the work and it’s presentation.
  • Upon receiving a manuscript that is of satisfactory quality, the editor may proceed to give his/her go-ahead for the publication of said article.
  • In order to reject a manuscript, article or any form of submitted content, the editor has to explain the reasons for rejecting the content.
  • The editor must be fair, and judge articles with utmost discretion, without being influenced by any factors that will bring down the integrity of the journal.
  • Editors must always stay ahead of deadlines. Their swift responses are essential in upholding the publishing standards set by the journal. In order to do so, editors are expected to peer review articles on time, meeting set deadlines for every article. If for any reason the editor is unavailable to conduct the peer review process, he/she must assign reviewers who can efficiently carry out the peer review process and ensure that the quality of the outcome is the best.
  • To better understand their roles and responsibilities, editors are welcome to take a look at the reviewer guidelines, since they will be held responsible for the quality of the content, approved to be published by the journal based on their peer review system.
  • Editors are to maintain the confidentiality of the literature they receive for review, throughout the peer review process, right up until publication.

Reviewer Guidelines

The American Journal of Biomedical Science and Research has set the following guideline to streamline the process of reviewing and to ensure quality content is published on this journal. The peer review process is carried out in complete discretion where the reviewer and the authors’ identities are kept hidden so as to not create any scope for discrimination and prejudice of any kind.

The peer review process is integral to publishing. We believe that the integrity of the peer review system is what upholds the quality of the content produced on the journal.

Peer review criteria for manuscript evaluation

  • Peer reviewers are expected to follow these guidelines to ensure high quality literature is produced and manuscripts are enhanced.
  • Articles submitted to the journal for publishing must be original and unique. The same results or insights should not be available anywhere else. Reviewers must beware of duplicate submissions, previously rejected work or authors and manuscripts that are not in the scope of this journal.
  • Reviewers must understand and digest the standards set for publishing by the journal in order to better review articles and see if they hold up to said standards.
  • With every published article, the expectation of the journal for better quality of content goes up. Continuously improving content is expected for publishing.
  • There should be current and future relevance of the topic submitted for review.

Reviewer’s roles and responsibilities during the peer review process

  • Put down your views regarding the quality and the presentation of the content and provided suggests for improvement of sections you feel can be upgraded.
  • Outline the strength and the weaknesses of every manuscript.
  • Suggest areas of improvement, let the author know what he can change or enhance to improve the quality of the article.
  • If you deem a manuscript unworthy of publishing, explain the reasons for rejection and how you arrived to the said conclusion.
  • Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the literature they receive for review, throughout the peer review process, right up until publication.
  • Even after publication, reviewers are allowed to refer to the published data only and not the content that they received previously in the form of drafts, during the peer review process.

Sign up for Newsletter

Sign up for our newsletter to receive the latest updates. We respect your privacy and will never share your email address with anyone else.