PEER REVIEW POLICY

ANJMLS adheres to the core recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and internationally recognized principles of responsible medical, biomedical, life sciences, and scholarly publishing.

Overview

The Al-Najam Journal of Medical and Life Sciences (ANJMLS) follows a rigorous peer-review process designed to ensure the scientific quality, methodological integrity, relevance, transparency, and ethical standards of all published manuscripts. Editors ensure that manuscripts are evaluated fairly and independently, without inappropriate influence arising from authors' identities, nationality, institutional affiliation, professional relationships, or other irrelevant characteristics.

All submissions first undergo editorial screening by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or designated Editorial Team to assess scope, scientific quality, reporting standards, ethical compliance, originality, and adherence to journal requirements. Manuscripts that are outside the journal's scope, scientifically inadequate, ethically non-compliant, or affected by unresolved research-integrity concerns may be rejected at this stage. Where appropriate, manuscripts may instead be returned to authors for technical, reporting, ethical, or formatting corrections before external peer review.

Peer Review at a Glance

Item Policy
Peer Review Type Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewers At least two independent expert reviewers, where appropriate
Final Decision Editor-in-Chief or designated independent Senior/Associate Editor
Revision Rounds Minor or Major Revision, with additional review when required
Conflict of Interest Mandatory disclosure by authors, reviewers, editors, and Guest Editors where applicable
Ethical Standards COPE Core Practices and applicable ICMJE recommendations
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality and must not upload confidential manuscript content to generative AI or third-party systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.
Confidentiality Maintained throughout editorial assessment, peer review, revision, and decision-making.

Peer Review Model

ANJMLS utilizes a structured Double-Blind Peer Review System:

✓ Author identities are concealed from external reviewers.
✓ Reviewer identities are concealed from authors.
✓ Manuscripts are appropriately anonymized before external peer review.

* Editorial decisions are based on scientific, methodological, and ethical considerations and are not influenced by nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, seniority, or personal relationships.

Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass initial editorial screening are normally sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in medicine, clinical sciences, life sciences, biomedical research, public health, laboratory sciences, pharmacy, allied health sciences, or another discipline appropriate to the manuscript. ANJMLS aims to develop a geographically and academically diverse reviewer network while maintaining appropriate subject expertise and independence. Authors may suggest potential reviewers where permitted; however, such suggestions are advisory only and the Editorial Office retains full authority over reviewer selection.

Reviewers are selected according to the following criteria:

  • • Relevant subject-matter expertise and an appropriate scholarly publication record.
  • • Demonstrated experience in research evaluation and scholarly peer review.
  • • No significant personal, professional, institutional, academic, or financial conflict of interest.
  • • Ability to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and timely evaluation.

Note: The Editor may appoint additional reviewers, including statistical reviewers, methodological experts, clinical specialists, laboratory scientists, epidemiologists, or other subject experts, when required by the complexity of the manuscript.

Review Criteria

  • ✓ Originality and scientific, clinical, or biomedical significance
  • ✓ Methodological rigor and validity
  • ✓ Reliability and reproducibility of the research
  • ✓ Appropriateness of statistical methods and interpretation
  • ✓ Compliance with relevant research ethics and participant-safety principles
  • ✓ Completeness, clarity, and transparency of reporting
  • ✓ Relevance to the scope of ANJMLS
  • ✓ Appropriate and balanced use of relevant scientific literature
  • ✓ Potential contribution to medical, life sciences, biomedical, or healthcare knowledge, where applicable

Editorial Decisions

Following editorial assessment and peer review, manuscripts may receive one of the following decisions:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

When substantial revisions are required, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief or designated Senior Editor retains final authority over publication decisions.

Reviewer Responsibilities & AI Policy

  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the peer-review process.
  • Provide objective, constructive, respectful, and evidence-based criticism.
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or promptly notify the Editorial Office if an extension is required.
  • Declare any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review assignment.
  • Identify concerns relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate image manipulation, data fabrication, data falsification, unethical research, or other forms of research misconduct.
  • Never use unpublished information, data, methods, or findings obtained through peer review for personal, academic, commercial, or professional advantage.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy: Reviewers must not upload, paste, transfer, or otherwise disclose confidential manuscript content to generative AI tools or third-party automated systems unless the journal has expressly authorized such use and appropriate confidentiality protections are in place. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the accuracy, confidentiality, and integrity of their review reports. AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly judgment.

Editorial Responsibilities & Governance

Editors are responsible for maintaining an impartial and confidential peer-review process, selecting appropriately qualified reviewers, managing conflicts of interest, protecting the integrity of the editorial record, and making publication decisions based on scientific, methodological, and ethical considerations. ANJMLS follows recognized publication-ethics principles when addressing concerns relating to research misconduct, corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, appeals, and complaints.

Editorial Independence: Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, or other individuals with relevant editorial conflicts shall be processed through an independent editorial arrangement. Conflicted individuals shall not participate in reviewer selection, editorial deliberation, or the final publication decision concerning their own submissions.

Confidentiality & Appeals Process

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, unpublished research information, and internal editorial records shall be treated as confidential and accessed only by individuals directly involved in the editorial process or otherwise authorized by the journal.

Authors may submit a reasoned and evidence-based appeal concerning an editorial decision where they believe a substantive scientific or procedural error has occurred. Appeals shall be reviewed by an editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision where reasonably possible. The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editorial authority shall make the final determination following appropriate consideration of the appeal.