Peer Review Policy

The Medical and Life Sciences (MLS) published by SMARCONS Publisher, follows a rigorous, fair, transparent, and ethical peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and scholarly contribution of all manuscripts submitted to the journal.

MLS uses an online manuscript management system to manage submissions, editorial screening, reviewer assignments, review reports, revision tracking, editorial decisions, and communication with authors and reviewers.

MLS  follows a double-blind peer review process. This means that the identities of authors are concealed from reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors throughout the review process. Authors are required to remove identifying information from the manuscript file before submission.

The journal normally aims to provide an initial editorial decision within 4–8 weeks; however, the review timeline may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript quality, revision requirements, and the number of review rounds required.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or assigned handling editor to determine whether the manuscript:

  • Falls within the aims and scope of MLS 

  • Meets the journal’s submission and formatting requirements

  • Demonstrates originality and scholarly relevance

  • Complies with ethical and publication policies

  • Shows sufficient academic quality to proceed to external peer review

Manuscripts that are outside the journal’s scope, poorly prepared, incomplete, ethically non-compliant, or lacking sufficient scholarly contribution may be rejected at the initial screening stage without external peer review.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are sent to at least two qualified independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, publication record, methodological knowledge, and absence of known conflicts of interest.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to the field

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal

  • Clarity of research problem, objectives, and research questions

  • Theoretical foundation and literature support

  • Appropriateness and rigor of methodology

  • Validity, reliability, and transparency of analysis

  • Interpretation and discussion of findings

  • Ethical compliance

  • Quality of writing, structure, tables, figures, and references

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, evidence-based, and respectful feedback to help authors improve the quality of their work.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and review process

  • Declare any actual or potential conflict of interest before accepting the review invitation

  • Review manuscripts objectively and professionally

  • Avoid personal criticism of authors

  • Provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments

  • Identify relevant published work that has not been cited, where appropriate

  • Notify the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, ethical misconduct, citation manipulation, or any other publication concern

  • Complete the review within the agreed timeline or inform the editorial office if an extension is required

Reviewers must not use unpublished material from a submitted manuscript for their own research or personal advantage.

Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for managing the peer review process fairly, independently, and confidentially. Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal’s scope, and reviewers’ recommendations.

Editorial decisions are not influenced by the authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, ethnicity, political beliefs, or personal characteristics.

The Editor-in-Chief has final responsibility for all editorial decisions. Editors may request additional reviews, seek clarification from reviewers, invite revisions, reject manuscripts, or accept manuscripts based on the quality of the manuscript and the outcome of the peer review process.

Editors must declare and avoid conflicts of interest. If an editor has a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript, the manuscript will be assigned to another qualified editor.

Editorial Decisions

After receiving reviewer reports, the editor may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Minor revision

  • Major revision

  • Resubmit for review

  • Reject

Authors receive the editorial decision along with reviewer comments and editorial guidance. If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript with a detailed response explaining how each reviewer and editorial comment has been addressed.

Depending on the nature of the revisions, the revised manuscript may be evaluated by the handling editor, returned to the original reviewers, or sent to new reviewers.

Revisions and Re-Review

Authors are expected to respond to reviewer and editor comments in a professional, complete, and timely manner. The revised manuscript should clearly indicate the changes made, and the response letter should address each comment point by point.

Minor revisions may be assessed by the handling editor. Major revisions may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation. Acceptance is granted only when the editor is satisfied that the manuscript meets the journal’s academic, methodological, ethical, and editorial standards.

After final acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting, proofreading, formatting, and production. At the proof stage, only minor corrections are allowed. Major content changes are not permitted after acceptance unless required by the editor for ethical or technical reasons.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to MLS are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, editorial staff, and any other individuals involved in the review process must not disclose manuscript content, reviewer comments, editorial correspondence, or decision details to unauthorized persons.

Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect, or appear to affect, their objectivity. Conflicts of interest may include financial relationships, institutional connections, personal relationships, academic competition, collaboration, or any other situation that may compromise impartial judgment.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer or editor will be replaced, and the manuscript will be handled by an independent qualified person.

Peer Review Integrity and Misconduct

MLS  is committed to protecting the integrity of the peer review process. The journal investigates suspected peer review misconduct, including but not limited to:

  • Fabricated reviewer identities

  • Manipulated review reports

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest

  • Citation manipulation

  • Breach of confidentiality

  • Inappropriate reviewer conduct

  • Coercive or biased review practices

Where misconduct is suspected, the editorial team may seek clarification, replace reviewers, request additional reviews, reject the manuscript, correct the publication record, or take further action in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that a decision was based on a misunderstanding, procedural error, conflict of interest, or misinterpretation of the manuscript. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial office with a clear explanation and supporting evidence.

The Editor-in-Chief, or an independent editor where appropriate, will review the appeal. Additional reviewers may be consulted if necessary. The appeal decision is final.

Complaints regarding peer review, editorial conduct, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics may be submitted to the editorial office at mls@smarcons.com.

Special Issues

If MLS publishes special issues, all special issue manuscripts will follow the same editorial standards, ethical requirements, and external peer review process as regular submissions. The Editor-in-Chief retains oversight of all special issue content, and guest editors, where appointed, must follow the journal’s editorial and peer review policies.

Manuscript Quality Standards

Manuscripts submitted to MLS must demonstrate:

  • A clear and relevant research problem

  • Strong theoretical and literature grounding

  • Appropriate research design and methodology

  • Transparent data analysis and interpretation

  • Ethical compliance where applicable

  • Clear presentation of findings

  • Balanced and relevant referencing

  • Original contribution to the field of Medical & Life Sciences and related disciplines

Acceptance Criteria

A manuscript may be accepted for publication if it:

  • Falls within the aims and scope of MLS 

  • Presents an original and meaningful scholarly contribution

  • Uses appropriate and rigorous methodology

  • Provides clear, reliable, and well-supported findings

  • Complies with ethical and publication requirements

  • Responds adequately to reviewer and editor comments

  • Meets the journal’s standards for structure, language, citation, and presentation

Rejection Criteria

A manuscript may be rejected if it:

  • Falls outside the aims and scope of the journal

  • Lacks originality or scholarly contribution

  • Has serious methodological or analytical weaknesses

  • Contains plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, falsified results, or other ethical concerns

  • Fails to meet human or animal research ethics requirements, where applicable

  • Contains unresolved authorship, data, or conflict of interest issues

  • Provides misleading conclusions or unsupported claims

  • Has poor structure, unclear writing, or inadequate presentation

  • Does not adequately address reviewer or editor comments during revision

Contact

For further information about the peer review process, authors may consult the Author Guidelines and Publication Ethics Policy or contact the editorial office at mls@smarcons.com.