Process

The Initial Review will be done by the assigned Editor (Chief Editor, Associate Editor 1, or Associate Editor 2). The Editor will assign 3 Reviewers (2 Internal Reviewers from the  Editorial Board and 1 External Reviewer) to start the Peer review process. Reviewer comments sent in from at least 2 Reviewers will be mandatory prior to reaching the initial decision of Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision or Reject. The final editorial review will be done by the Chief Editor. 

Flowchart

JMUST Peer-review process flowchart

Details

JMUST follows a single-blind review system. 

The handling editor assigns 3 reviewers (2 Internal Reviewers from the Editorial Board and 1 External Reviewer) to start the Peer review process.

The reviewers receive an invitation to review the article; they can accept or decline the invitation to review the article. The invitation is valid for 2 weeks. Email reminders are sent regularly till the reviewers either accept/decline the invitation. If the reviewer does not accept the invitation, it is automatically treated as declined.

When a reviewer declines an invitation, the editor is notified and he can invite additional peer reviewers if required.

After accepting the invitation, the peer reviewer can immediately review the article in detail and provide feedback. The reviewer provides detailed comments in addition to answering a questionnaire that can be filled out during the review of the article. The reviewer provides comments for the author and confidential comments for the editor. 

The reviewer also rates the article using the star rating system and recommends whether the article can be “Accepted as is” or with “Minor revisions” or “Major revisions” or should be “Rejected”. 

The reviewer also indicates if (s)he would like to re-review the article after it is revised and re-submitted.

After the review process is completed, the editor reviews the feedback and decides whether to accept the article or seek revisions or reject it. If the article requires revisions, the editor sends the manuscript back to the author with review feedback and his/her own comments and suggestions.

The author revises the manuscript (using the online editing facility) and submits the revised article. The author can also choose to withdraw the submission at this point.

When the author re-submits the revised manuscript, the editor reviews the revision and if reviewers have requested to re-review after revision, sends the manuscript for re-review. Based on reviewer feedback, the editor seeks revisions/corrections or accepts or rejects the article.

If the article is accepted, the manuscript is sent to the Chief Editor for final review. After review, the Chief Editor initiates copy editing and publication fee payment workflows. Copyedited manuscripts are signed off by the authors and the editors before finally being approved by the Chief Editor for publication.