top of page

Editorial Policies for JERMS

1. Peer Review Process

​​

We are committed to maintaining the quality and integrity of the content we publish. Currently, we utilize an Author-Suggested peer review followed by Post-Publication Peer Review model to engage with our readers and the broader medical community. This allows for ongoing feedback and ensures that our articles remain relevant and scientifically robust.

​

  • Author-Suggested Reviewer Requirement: Authors must nominate at least three potential reviewers. We require at least one of these suggested reviewers to accept the invitation and provide a review for the article to proceed to publication.
     

How Post-Publication Peer Review Works:

  1. Article Submission and Publication:

    • All articles submitted to JERMS are initially reviewed by our editorial team for quality, relevance, and adherence to our journal's guidelines. Once accepted, the article is published on our platform.

  2. Open for Comments:

    • After publication, the article is open for Post-Publication Peer Review. This means that any medical professional, researcher, or reader can leave constructive feedback or comments on the published article. These comments can address the scientific content, methodology, or offer additional insights.

  3. Moderation of Comments:

    • All comments submitted will be reviewed by the editorial team to ensure they meet our guidelines for respectful and constructive feedback. We encourage comments that contribute to the scientific discussion, offer new perspectives, or suggest improvements for the article.

  4. Incorporating Feedback:

    • After receiving post-publication comments, the editorial team will evaluate the feedback. Depending on the nature of the comments, the article may be updated or revised. Significant revisions will be marked as updated in the article history to maintain transparency.

  5. Transparency and Interaction:

    • Authors are encouraged to respond to the comments and engage in constructive discussions with the reviewers and readers. This interaction enhances the academic value of the published content and fosters an open academic dialogue.

Why Post-Publication Peer Review?

  • Continuous Improvement: Post-publication peer review allows for real-time, ongoing feedback from the medical and academic community. This process provides authors with the opportunity to improve their work based on expert insights.

  • Increased Accessibility: By enabling the wider community to participate in the review process, we ensure that diverse viewpoints are considered.

  • Flexibility: Our post-publication review model offers flexibility for authors to revise their work based on received feedback, improving the overall quality of published articles

​

2. Publication Ethics

JERMS is committed to maintaining high ethical standards in publishing. All authors must adhere to the principles set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Key elements include:

 

  • Conflict of Interest: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including financial support, affiliations, or personal relationships that could influence their work.

  • Research Integrity: Submitted manuscripts must be original, not previously published or under consideration elsewhere. Plagiarism or data fabrication will result in immediate rejection and further action if necessary.

​

​

3. Plagiarism Policy

All submissions will be screened for plagiarism using appropriate detection software. Manuscripts with substantial overlap with existing literature or lacking proper citations will be returned for revision or rejected.

 

4.  Authorship Criteria

All authors listed must meet the following criteria:

 

  • Significant contributions to the research and manuscript preparation.

  • Drafting or revising the manuscript critically.

  • Approval of the final version for publication.

  • Accountability for all aspects of the work.

​

​

5. Open Access and Licensing

Articles published in JERMS are freely accessible to promote the dissemination of knowledge. Authors retain copyright but grant the journal the right to publish and distribute their articles. The journal may use a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).

​

​

6. Ethical Approval for Research

For studies involving human subjects or animals, authors must provide evidence of ethical approval from relevant institutional review boards. Submissions lacking this documentation will not be considered.

​

​

7. Data Sharing and Availability

Authors are encouraged to share their data and research materials in publicly accessible repositories. Manuscripts must include a statement regarding data availability.

​

​

8. Retraction and Correction Policy

JERMS will issue retractions for articles found to be plagiarized or containing significant errors that invalidate the findings. Corrections will be issued for minor errors that do not significantly affect the article's conclusions.

​

​

9. Appeals Process

Authors can appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written request within two weeks of the decision notification. Appeals will be reviewed by different editors, and the author will be informed of the outcome.

​

​

10. Editorial Independence

The editorial team operates independently, making decisions based solely on academic merit and journal policies, free from commercial or external influences.

​

​

11. Withdrawal of Manuscripts

Authors may withdraw their manuscripts at any stage before acceptance by submitting a written request to the Editorial Board.

​

​

12. Diversity and Inclusion
JERMS encourages submissions from diverse authors and perspectives to enhance the journal's reach and relevance.

bottom of page