Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to JOMADS undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure scientific quality, originality, and relevance.
Upon submission, each manuscript is initially evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief to assess its suitability with respect to the journal’s scope, academic standards, and ethical compliance. Manuscripts that meet the preliminary requirements are then assigned to the Managing Editor for further processing.
The Managing Editor conducts an initial technical and administrative screening, including evaluation of completeness, formatting, plagiarism screening, and adherence to ethical standards. Manuscripts that pass this stage are forwarded to at least two independent reviewers with recognized expertise in the relevant field.
JOMADS applies a double-blind review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This approach is implemented to maintain objectivity, minimize bias, and uphold standards of academic integrity and fairness.
Reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript based on scientific merit, methodological rigor, originality, clarity of presentation, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field. Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:
- Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form.
- Accepted by Minor Revisions, the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections (let authors revised with stipulated time).
- Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revised with stipulated time).
- Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.
For revised submissions, authors are required to provide a detailed response to reviewers’ comments. The revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief. The entire review process is conducted in accordance with internationally recognized ethical standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.
A schematic overview of the manuscript handling workflow, from submission to final editorial decision, is provided in the accompanying figure.
