Peer Review Policy

National Journal of Medical Research & Yoga Sciences (NJMRYS)

NJMRYS follows a rigorous, transparent, and unbiased peer review process to ensure the quality, validity, and originality of the scholarly work it publishes.

1. Type of Peer Review

NJMRYS adopts a Double-Blind Peer Review process.

The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.
This ensures impartial evaluation and minimizes bias.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is first assessed by the Editorial Office for:

Scope and relevance to medical sciences and yoga sciences
Compliance with journal guidelines
Ethical approval and declarations
Plagiarism check (using standard plagiarism detection tools)
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk-rejected without external review.

3. External Peer Review

Manuscripts passing initial screening are sent to two or more independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, publication record, and research experience.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on:
Originality and scientific merit
Methodology and data analysis
Ethical compliance
Clarity and presentation
Relevance and contribution to the field

4. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

Accept without revisions
Minor revisions
Major revisions
Reject
Reviewer comments are shared with authors for revision and improvement.

5. Revision Process

Authors are required to submit a revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments.
Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

6. Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewers’ reports and editorial judgment.
The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.

7. Ethical Standards

NJMRYS adheres to:

COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines
ICMR and international ethical standards
Declaration of Helsinki (for clinical studies)
Any suspected misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission) is handled strictly.

8. Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents.
Reviewers must not use unpublished data for personal research.

9. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest.
If a conflict exists, an alternate reviewer is appointed.

10. Review Timeline

Initial editorial screening: 7–10 days
Peer review process: 3–6 weeks
Final decision: within 6–8 weeks of submission

11. Open Access Policy

NJMRYS is an open-access journal, and the peer review process is independent of publication charges.