Responsibility of the Reviewer(s)

Peer review and reviewers are crucial to the publishing process, it validates an author’s research to confirm its suitability for publication. The “Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Healthcare” is a double-blind, peer-reviewed journal where the editor(s) mediate with the reviewer(s) and corresponding author(s). The reviewer(s) are subject experts, assigned by the editor to judge the quality, importance, and scientific contribution of the submitted manuscript. Reviewing process should be completed within the defined time limit without any biased approach. If review is not possible within given time frame, you can approach the editor(s) for providing extension in time. Your expert comments are supposed to be submitted through the online process. Please check all required documents (text material, figures, rough data, etc.) on which you need to provide your feedback. If anything is missing please ask to the editor(s) only. Please read more about the reviewer(s) responsibilities by downloading the ethical guidelines:

https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers-cope.pdf

Instructions for peer review

The peer review of the manuscripts has been classified in three screening stages. During the screening, the reviewer must focus on the originality and novelty of the manuscript. The article should possess scientific soundness and industrial significance with good quality presentation. For more details about the peer review policy:

First stage Screening

• Submitted papers must correspond to one of the topics of the Journal
• Incomplete Structure
• Plagiarism and self-plagiarism check using Turnitin software
• Low-quality tables or figures
• Spelling or grammar errors
• The corresponding author declares that he/she has obtained the consent of all the co-authors before including their names in the paper

Second stage Screening

• The paper will be reviewed by following the Journal peer review policy.
• Revisions may be requested during the review process.
• The second peer review may be requested after major/minor revision.
• The final decisions of acceptance or rejection are made by the Editor

Final/Third stage screening

The Editor would affirm that the publication ethics & guidelines have been followed before making the final decision.

Accepted

The paper is accepted and does not need further modification.

Accept with minor revisions

The paper will be accepted after minor revisions. In such a case, the revised paper will be sent to be reviewed by the original reviewers or editor can make the final decision.

Re-evaluate with major revisions

The paper will be sent to be reviewed by the original reviewers unless they opt out.

Rejected

The paper will not be accepted due to major deficiencies. And it is not recommended to be resubmitted.

Revision

Authors must revise their papers within the allowed time. Manuscripts with major revisions will be sent to original reviewers for the second-round review. Manuscripts with minor revisions will usually be reviewed by the editor. The final decision will be made by the editor after careful and unbiased assessment.

Changes the Authorship

There is no authorship change permissible after the final submission on the Manuscript submission system .