Peer Review Policy

1. Purpose

IJOMRC follows a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to maintain the quality, originality, academic relevance, and ethical standards of published research.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Each manuscript is first examined by the editorial office for scope, originality, basic academic quality, formatting, plagiarism concerns, and compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. Manuscripts outside the journal’s scope or not meeting essential requirements may be returned without external review.

3. Double-Blind Review

IJOMRC normally follows a double-blind peer-review process in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another, as far as technically and practically possible.

4. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected on the basis of subject expertise, research experience, academic qualifications, availability, and absence of conflicts of interest. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and confidential comments.

5. Review Criteria

•    
• Originality and significance of the research
•    
• Clarity of objectives and research questions
•    
• Appropriateness of methodology
•    
• Quality of analysis and interpretation
•    
• Organization, language, and presentation
•    
• Use of relevant and reliable references
•    
• Ethical compliance and transparency of reporting

6. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers’ comments and the editor’s assessment, a manuscript may be accepted, accepted subject to minor revisions, returned for major revisions, or rejected. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor.

7. Revision and Resubmission

Authors may be asked to submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments. Revision does not guarantee acceptance, and the manuscript may be sent for further review when necessary.

8. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose, use, or reproduce unpublished information from a manuscript without appropriate permission.

9. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflict of interest and should decline involvement where impartiality may be compromised.