Peer review process

  • Peer review stands to helps authors and editors improving the research reporting quality. SJMS adheres to a double-blind peer review process. Thus, after initial editorial acceptance, the article will be forwarded to many reviewers with relevant expertise.
  • It is required to review the article by at least two reviewers, and one month is permitted to review the manuscript.
  • If their decision with publication, their required article improvement recommendations will be sent to the authors to provide their response within one month. After the authors revisions, manuscript may be submitted to a second peer review cycle, returned to the same reviewers or a direct editorial decision could be issued (it may be acceptance, further revision or rejection).
  • In the states of contradictory decision of reviewers, the article will be submitted to another reviewer or an editor to further review the manuscript and his opinion will support one of contradictory reviewers.
  • The selection of reviewers depends on their expertise, reputation and the own prior experience of a referee’s characteristics.
  • The corresponding author will be asked to – selectively- provide two reviewers, to increase the journal database of reviewers. However, those recommended reviewers do not review the article submitted by recommended authors.  

Final decision after the whole peer review process  

  • Acceptance
  • Inviting authors to revise their manuscript
  • Rejection.

Post-publication peer review

  • SJMS among other publishers, believe that, the true peer review process just begins only on the date a manuscript was published. Thus, post-publication peer review is recommended and SJMS welcome all comments. Any post-publication peer review recommendations, questions, or criticisms will be submitted to editorial office (see contact details).