Peer Review Policy

Overview

ApexMed – Journal of Health Sciences is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic excellence and integrity through a rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo thorough evaluation to ensure scientific validity, clinical relevance, methodological soundness, and ethical compliance. The peer review process is central to ensuring the credibility and quality of the research we publish.

Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review

To uphold fairness and objectivity, ApexMed employs a double-blind peer review system, meaning:

  • Author anonymity: Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.

  • Reviewer anonymity: Authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities.

This system ensures that manuscripts are judged solely on their scientific merit, independent of personal or institutional affiliations.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Submission and Preliminary Editorial Screening

  • Authors must submit manuscripts via the official ApexMed online portal.

  • The editorial office conducts an initial screening to verify:

    • Scope and relevance to health sciences

    • Formatting and compliance with submission guidelines

    • Ethical approval (for studies involving humans or animals)

    • Plagiarism check (using Turnitin or equivalent software)

Submissions not meeting these standards may be rejected without external review.

2. Reviewer Selection and Assignment

  • Suitable manuscripts are forwarded to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

  • Reviewers are selected based on:

    • Subject matter expertise

    • Research experience and publication history

    • Absence of any conflict of interest with the authors or study

3. Review Process

  • Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

    • Scientific rigor and originality

    • Clinical and public health significance

    • Research design and statistical analysis

    • Ethical compliance and transparency

    • Clarity of presentation

  • Reviewers submit recommendations:

    • Accept without revision

    • Accept with minor revisions

    • Major revisions required (resubmission)

    • Reject

4. Editorial Decision and Communication

  • The editor evaluates the reviewers' reports and issues a final decision.

  • If revisions are needed, authors receive detailed feedback and a timeline for resubmission.

  • Revised manuscripts may undergo further review.

  • Authors are informed of the decision with comments to enhance transparency and learning.

Timeframe

The typical peer review cycle takes 4–6 weeks, though this may vary based on:

  • Reviewer availability

  • Manuscript complexity

  • Number of revisions required

Authors are encouraged to respond to revision requests promptly to expedite publication.

Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

Selection Criteria

Reviewers are selected for their scientific expertise, integrity, and impartiality, and represent a diverse international community of health professionals and researchers.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts are confidential documents. Reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscript content

  • Use data or ideas from the manuscript before publication

  • Discuss content with third parties without editor approval

Ethical Conduct

Reviewers must:

  • Provide objective and constructive feedback

  • Declare any conflicts of interest (personal, professional, or financial)

  • Refrain from discriminatory or biased comments

Appeals Process

If an author believes a rejection was unjustified, they may submit a formal appeal with justification. Appeals are:

  • Reviewed by the editorial board

  • May involve a third-party expert for independent review

  • Final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief

Ethical Standards and Compliance

ApexMed aligns with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and adheres to ethical benchmarks set by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan. All editorial and review practices are grounded in transparency, fairness, and academic responsibility.

Reviewer Recognition

In recognition of the valuable contributions of reviewers:

  • ApexMed publishes an annual list of peer reviewers (with consent).

  • Certificates of appreciation are issued upon request.

Conclusion

At ApexMed, peer review is the cornerstone of quality control. Our double-blind, ethically governed, and scientifically rigorous system ensures that only original, impactful, and clinically relevant research is published. This commitment strengthens scientific progress and builds trust within the global medical community.