Review Process Overview
GJMS employs a Double-Blind Peer Review process. This means that the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the entire review process to eliminate bias.
[Image of academic peer review process flowchart]Initial Screening
The Editorial Office checks for plagiarism, ethical compliance, and adherence to formatting guidelines.
Editorial Assessment
The Editor-in-Chief determines if the manuscript aligns with the journal's scope and quality standards.
External Review
At least two independent subject-matter experts provide detailed feedback and recommendations.
Final Decision
The handling editor makes a final decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, reputation, and specific contribution to the surgical field. We maintain a diverse database of international reviewers to ensure a global perspective on clinical research.
Conflict of Interest
Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review invitation. If a conflict exists, the reviewer will be recused from the process.