The African Journal of Medical Research (JARM) applies a rigorous, structured, and independent peer-review process to ensure the scientific quality, methodological validity, and relevance of published work.

Type of Review

The journal uses a double-blind peer review system, in which neither the authors nor the reviewers are aware of each other's identities. This approach ensures impartiality and minimizes bias.

Editorial Process Steps

1. Manuscript Submission

Manuscripts are submitted through the journal's platform and must comply with the author guidelines, including structure, formatting, and Vancouver referencing style.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial team performs a preliminary assessment to verify:

• compliance with journal requirements;
• relevance to the journal's scope;
• minimum writing quality;
• absence of plagiarism or inappropriate content.

At this stage, a manuscript may be rejected without external review if it does not meet basic criteria.

3. Assignment to an Editor

The manuscript is assigned to an Associate Editor or Section Editor, who oversees the entire review process.

4. Selection of Reviewers

The manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their scientific expertise and absence of conflicts of interest.

5. Scientific Evaluation

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on the following criteria:

• originality and scientific relevance;
• methodological rigor;
• validity of results;
• quality of discussion;
• clarity and quality of writing;
• appropriateness of references.

Each reviewer submits a detailed report with recommendations.

6. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' reports, the handling editor makes a decision:

• acceptance without revision;
• acceptance with minor revisions;
• major revisions required;
• rejection.

7. Author Revision

If revisions are requested, authors must:

• revise the manuscript according to reviewers' comments;
• provide a detailed response to reviewers;
• justify any changes or lack of changes.

8. Final Validation

The revised manuscript is evaluated by the editor and, if necessary, returned to reviewers for further validation before a final decision is made.

9. Acceptance and Publication

Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes:

• editorial formatting;
• final proofreading;
• PDF production;
• online publication.

Review Timeline

The average review time ranges between 2 to 6 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated with strict confidentiality. Information contained in submissions must not be used for personal purposes by reviewers or editors.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest. In such cases, they must withdraw from the review process.

Publication Ethics

The journal adheres to international standards of publication ethics. Any suspicion of plagiarism, data fabrication, or misconduct will lead to thorough investigation and may result in rejection or retraction after publication.