Peer Review Policy

International Council for Medical Education Research and Development (ICMERD) upholds the highest standards of scientific integrity and quality through a rigorous peer-review process. The peer-review system ensures that all submitted manuscripts are evaluated objectively, fairly, and transparently by experts in the respective fields before publication.

Overview of the Peer-Review Process

ICMERD follows a double-blind peer-review process, meaning:
✔ The identities of authors and reviewers remain anonymous to prevent bias.
✔ Manuscripts are evaluated based on scientific merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
✔ Ethical and methodological rigor is ensured before acceptance.

Each submission undergoes the following stages:

1. Initial Screening (Editorial Review)

  • Upon submission, the editorial office reviews the manuscript for completeness, formatting, and adherence to journal guidelines.
  • The manuscript is checked for plagiarism using advanced similarity detection tools.
  • If the manuscript does not meet basic requirements, it may be returned to the author for revisions or rejected outright.

2. Assignment to Reviewers

  • Manuscripts that pass the editorial screening are assigned to two or more independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
  • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, previous contributions, and absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:
    ✔ Scientific rigor and validity
    ✔ Originality and contribution to the field
    ✔ Methodological soundness
    ✔ Clarity, coherence, and presentation
    ✔ Ethical considerations
  • Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommend:
    1. Acceptance (with or without minor revisions)
    2. Major revisions and re-evaluation
    3. Rejection (if the manuscript does not meet scientific or ethical standards)

4. Decision & Author Notification

  • The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the reviewers’ recommendations and makes a final decision.
  • Authors receive a decision letter along with detailed reviewer comments to help improve their manuscript.
  • If revisions are required, authors must submit a revised manuscript with a point-by-point response addressing reviewers’ concerns.

5. Final Acceptance & Publication

  • Once the revised manuscript meets all scientific and editorial requirements, it is accepted for publication.
  • The final version undergoes copyediting, typesetting, DOI assignment, and online publication under the open-access model.

Peer Review Timelines

  • Initial Editorial Screening: 5-7 days
  • Peer Review Process: 3-6 weeks
  • Revision Time (if required): 2-4 weeks
  • Final Decision & Publication: Within 8-10 weeks from submission

ICMERD aims to provide efficient yet rigorous peer-review timelines to ensure timely dissemination of research findings.

Reviewer Responsibilities

ICMERD’s peer reviewers play a critical role in maintaining research integrity. Reviewers are expected to:

✔ Provide unbiased, constructive, and confidential feedback
✔ Evaluate manuscripts objectively based on scientific validity
✔ Identify potential ethical concerns (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication)
✔ Maintain confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest

If a reviewer feels unqualified or has a conflict of interest, they must decline the review request immediately.

Editorial Decision Categories

The following outcomes are possible after the peer-review process:

  1. Accepted as is – The manuscript is ready for publication.
  2. Minor revisions required – Authors need to make small improvements.
  3. Major revisions required – The manuscript requires substantial changes before reconsideration.
  4. Rejected – The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or scope.

Rejections may occur due to scientific weaknesses, ethical concerns, or lack of novelty. However, authors are encouraged to address feedback and submit improved versions to the same or another journal.

Ethical Considerations in Peer Review

ICMERD adheres to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines to ensure fairness and transparency in peer review. Key ethical principles include:

  • No conflicts of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers
  • No plagiarism, data falsification, or unethical research practices
  • Strict confidentiality – unpublished manuscripts should not be shared or discussed
  • Respect for intellectual property – reviewers must not use unpublished research for personal gain

Any ethical violations may result in manuscript rejection, retraction, or author sanctions.

Appeals & Complaints

If authors disagree with a rejection or reviewer comments, they can submit a formal appeal letter providing justification. Appeals are reviewed by the Editorial Board, and a final decision is made based on merit.

For ethical concerns regarding the review process, authors can contact the editorial office at:
Email: editor.icmerd@gmail.com / editor@icmerd.com

ICMERD’s double-blind peer-review policy ensures that published research is scientifically sound, ethically responsible, and globally impactful. We are committed to maintaining high publication standards and supporting researchers in advancing knowledge through rigorous and fair review practices.

For submission guidelines, visit: ICMERD Journals
For APC details, visit: ICMERD APC

ICMERD – Ensuring Research Excellence through Rigorous Peer Review!