Reviewer Guideline

Peer review policy

The peer review process is a practice aiming to preserve the quality of published science and prevent misconduct and the sharing of non-evidence-based information and data. All eligible scientific journals must guarantee excellence in scholarly publishing through the implementation of the peer review process. Peer reviewers are first-line soldiers in maintaining the quality and reliability of the Barw  Medical Journal’s contents, which is why we vigorously adhere to and follow this process.

Manuscript Pre-Evaluation

All submitted manuscripts initially undergo pre-evaluation by one of the editors to confirm the authors compliance (Manuscript preparation) with the policy, scope and author guidelines of the Barw  Medical Journal. Full acceptance at this stage is exceedingly rare, and rejection can be due to non-integration with the scope of the journal, an improperly prepared manuscript, poor grammar or poor English language, non-compliance with the author guidelines, or a lack of novelty. Manuscripts that pass the pre-evaluation process will be suggested to several reviewers with expertise in the field for critical evaluation. After reviewers’ responses, authors will be notified within one week whether their submission is considered to be rejected, revised, or accepted.

Peer review process

The Barw  Medical Journal implements double-blind peer review, in which the identities and profiles of both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the reviewing process. Peer reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the fields of submitted manuscripts, as our reviewer database is continuously enriched and updated.

Reviewer reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate a manuscript based on the following criteria:

1. Is it original research, and does it represent new findings? Does it add to the current knowledge of the literature?
2. Does it use a proper methodology and reliable materials?
3. Does it represent the results clearly and are they compatible with the conclusions?
4. Does it properly and correctly cite and reference previous works?
5. Does it follow scientific and ethical guidelines? 
6. Do linguistic corrections need to be made?
7. Does it implement proper data analysis?
8. Does the reviewer have any conflicts of interest with the authors? (If yes, that reviewer is not selected for the peer review process)

The time required for peer review process 

In the Barw Medical Journal, the first round of peer review probably takes 7-21 days based on the response of the reviewers. Each manuscript will be evaluated by several anonymous reviewers. The editor considers the reviewers' evaluation and report when deciding whether to accept, reject, or request revisions of a manuscript. The Editor will send the decision and reviewers' comments to the author for proper action. Then, revised manuscripts will be sent back to the reviewers before a final decision is made. Finally, the Chief Editor makes a decision and informs the author about the final decision. If, at the first round of the peer review process, there is disagreement among the reviewers, the manuscript will undergo the second round of peer review by different reviewers.

Becoming a reviewer in the Barw Medical Journal

If you are not currently a Barw Medical Journal reviewer and would like to be considered, please contact the editorial office at ([email protected]) for more information.