The Asia Pacific Journal of Medical Innovations (APJMI) employs a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original research that advances the field of medical innovations, particularly within the Asia-Pacific region. Our peer review process is designed to uphold the integrity of scientific research, providing authors with constructive feedback while ensuring that only research of the highest standard is published.

 

1. Submission and Initial Evaluation

• Manuscript Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts through the APJMI online submission system. Each submission is accompanied by a cover letter, which should outline the significance of the work and its relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
• Initial Screening: Upon submission, the editorial office conducts an initial screening of the manuscript to ensure it meets the journal's basic requirements, including adherence to formatting guidelines, originality (checked via plagiarism detection software), and relevance to the journal's scope. Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be rejected outright at this stage.

2. Assignment to an Editor

• Editor-in-Chief Assignment: Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Senior Editor with expertise in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief/Senior Editor conducts a preliminary evaluation of the manuscript, assessing its novelty, significance, and alignment with the journal's focus.
• Selection of Handling Editor: If the manuscript is deemed suitable for further review, the Editor-in-Chief or Senior Editor assigns it to a Handling Editor with specific expertise in its subject area. The Handling Editor oversees the peer review process and recommends the manuscript's suitability for publication.

3. Peer Reviewer Selection

• Reviewer Identification: The Handling Editor identifies potential peer reviewers based on their expertise, experience, and familiarity with the manuscript's topic. Reviewers are selected from the journal's database of qualified experts or through their professional networks. Typically, two to three reviewers are invited to assess each manuscript.
• Invitation to Review: Invited reviewers receive an email invitation including the manuscript title, abstract, and relevant instructions. Reviewers are asked to confirm their availability and declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting the invitation.
• Conflict of Interest Check: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts affecting their impartiality in evaluating the manuscript. If a conflict is identified, the reviewer is expected to decline the invitation, and an alternative reviewer is selected.

4. Double-Blind Review

• Anonymity: APJMI follows a double-blind review process, where both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other. This ensures that the review is unbiased and based solely on the content and quality of the manuscript.
• Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on several critical criteria, including:

• Originality and Novelty: Does the research contribute new knowledge or insights to the field?
• Methodological Rigor: Are the research methods sound, appropriate, and well-executed?
• Data and Results: Are the data presented accurately, and do the results support the conclusions?
• Relevance and Impact: Is the research significant within the context of the field, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region?
• Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript well-organized, clearly written, and free from significant errors?

• Reviewer's Report: Reviewers provide a detailed report, including specific comments and suggestions for improvement. They may also highlight the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses and recommend to the Handling Editor whether to accept, revise, or reject the manuscript.

5. Editorial Decision

• Handling Editor's Assessment: Upon receiving the reviewers' reports, the Handling Editor evaluates the feedback and synthesizes it into a recommendation. The Handling Editor may request additional reviews if the initial reviews are inconclusive or conflicting.
• Decision Categories:

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted as is or with minor revisions.
• Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor adjustments or clarifications. The authors are asked to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the revised manuscript.
• Major Revisions: Significant changes are required. The authors are given detailed feedback and asked to make substantial revisions before resubmitting. The revised manuscript may undergo another round of review.
• Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in APJMI, either due to significant flaws in the research or because it does not align with the journal's scope.

• Final Decision: The Handling Editor's recommendation, along with the reviewers' reports, is sent to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision. Authors are notified of the decision, the reviewers' comments, and any required revisions.

6. Revision and Resubmission

• Author Revisions: If revisions are required, authors are given a specific timeframe to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the manuscript. A detailed response to reviewers, outlining how each comment was addressed must accompany the revised manuscript.
• Re-Review (if applicable): For significant revisions, the revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for a second round of evaluation to ensure that all concerns have been adequately addressed.

7. Final Acceptance and Publication

• Final Check: Once a manuscript is accepted, it undergoes a final check by the editorial office to ensure all revisions have been incorporated and that the manuscript meets the journal's formatting and ethical standards.
• Proofing: Authors are sent proofs of their accepted manuscript for final approval. This is the last opportunity to make minor corrections before publication.

• Online Publication: Accepted manuscripts are published online in the next available issue of APJMI. The article is immediately available under the journal's open-access policy and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) license.

8. Post-Publication

• Post-Publication Review: APJMI encourages continued scholarly discussion and feedback on published articles. If substantial new information or concerns arise after publication, the editorial team may consider issuing corrections, retractions, or updates.
• Author and Reviewer Recognition: APJMI acknowledges the contributions of both authors and reviewers in advancing medical science. The journal recognizes reviewers who provide high-quality, timely reviews and may be invited to join the editorial board or serve as guest editors.

The peer review process at APJMI is designed to maintain the highest standards of scientific integrity, ensuring that the research we publish is accurate, credible, and valuable to the global medical community, with a particular emphasis on the unique challenges and opportunities within the Asia-Pacific region.