INFORMATION
Peer Review Process
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
At Shifa Health Journal, every manuscript undergoes a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure scientific integrity, originality, and academic quality. In this system, both authors and reviewers remain anonymous, ensuring an unbiased and objective evaluation.
1. Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editorial Team to determine whether they meet the journal’s focus and scope, author guidelines, and ethical standards. Manuscripts may also undergo similarity checking to detect potential plagiarism.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s requirements may be returned to the authors without proceeding to peer review.
2. Double-Blind Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field.
The manuscript is prepared in a blind version, where author names, affiliations, acknowledgements, and identifying references are removed. Likewise, the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to the authors.
3. Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
- Originality and novelty of the research
- Relevance to the journal’s scope
- Soundness of research methodology
- Clarity of data analysis and interpretation
- Contribution to scientific knowledge
- Quality of writing and presentation
Reviewers may provide feedback in two ways:
- Comments directly within the manuscript (annotations or tracked comments).
- Comments through the review form or reviewer discussion available in the journal system.
4. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editor may make one of the following decisions:
- Accept Submission
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Resubmit for Review
- Decline Submission
Authors requested to revise their manuscripts must submit a revised version along with a response to reviewers explaining how the comments were addressed.
5. Final Decision and Publication
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief after considering the reviewers’ recommendations and the revised manuscript.
Confidentiality and Ethics
All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest, and provide objective and constructive evaluations in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.
All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest, and provide objective and constructive evaluations in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.
