Peer Review Policy

KJMHS applies a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential as far as practically possible. The journal’s About page also describes KJMHS as following rigorous double-blind peer-review procedures to ensure manuscript quality, integrity, and originality.

Peer Review Process

After initial editorial screening, suitable manuscripts are assigned to qualified reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on:

  1. Originality and scientific contribution.
  2. Relevance to the journal’s scope.
  3. Clarity of research question and objectives.
  4. Appropriateness of methodology.
  5. Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation.
  6. Ethical approval and informed consent where applicable.
  7. Quality of discussion and conclusion.
  8. Adequacy and relevance of references.
  9. Overall clarity, structure, and language.

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision.
  • Accept after minor revision.
  • Reconsider after major revision.
  • Reject.

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor after considering reviewers’ comments, editorial assessment, and the authors’ responses to revision requests.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, copy, or use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewer Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline the review if they have any conflict of interest related to the authors, institutions, funders, or subject matter of the manuscript. Conflicts may include recent collaboration, institutional affiliation, personal relationships, financial interests, or academic competition.