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.
Information apart from the published content, which may have been received previously can be used only after getting permission from the author.
Reviewers are expected to be fair and impartial. Discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated by the journal
Reviewers are also expected to uphold the deadlines set for peer review and decision-making.
The peer review process is a vital part of the publishing of open source content. We have a created a process we trust so as to produce high quality, unique content that is engaging and accurate.