Peer-Review Policy

The Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Medical Sciences (JUQUMS) adheres to a meticulous double-anonymized review process to ensure the impartial evaluation of submissions. Initially, all contributions undergo an assessment by the editor to gauge their suitability for publication. Papers deemed appropriate for the journal are subsequently sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers, chosen for their expertise in the relevant field, who evaluate the scientific quality of the manuscript. The Editor retains the ultimate responsibility for making the final determination regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles, and their decision is considered binding. In line with our commitment to impartiality, Editors abstain from involvement in decisions concerning papers they have authored themselves, those authored by family members or colleagues, or any submissions pertaining to products or services in which the editor has a vested interest. In such cases, all submissions are subject to the journal's standard review procedures, with the peer-review process conducted independently, ensuring fairness and objectivity throughout the evaluation process.
 

Peer-Review Process

At the Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Medical Sciences (JUQUMS) we are committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly integrity, rigor, and transparency in the publication of academic research. Our peer review process plays a central role in ensuring the quality and credibility of the work we publish. Here, we provide an overview of our peer review process:
 

• Submissions and Initial Assessment:
  Upon receiving a manuscript, our editorial team conducts an initial assessment to ensure that it aligns with the focus and scope of our journal. Manuscripts that meet our criteria proceed to the next stage.
   
• Peer Reviewer Selection:
  Expertise is essential for evaluating the scientific and scholarly merit of a manuscript. We carefully select peer reviewers with expertise in the manuscript's subject matter. Reviewers may include members of our Editorial Board and external experts.
   
• Double-Blind Peer Review:
  We adhere to a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are concealed. This anonymity ensures impartial evaluation and minimizes potential biases.
   
• Peer Review Evaluation:
  Reviewers rigorously assess the manuscript, evaluating its originality, methodology, significance, and adherence to ethical guidelines. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations to help authors improve their work.
   
• Decision Making:
  Based on the reviewers' assessments, the editorial team makes a publication decision. This decision considers the quality and suitability of the manuscript for our journal.
   
• Revisions and Resubmission:
  If revisions are required, authors are provided with detailed feedback from reviewers. They have the opportunity to revise and improve their work before a final decision is made.
   
• Ethical Considerations:
  Our peer review process ensures that ethical considerations, such as plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and research integrity, are thoroughly examined.
   
• Timely Review:
  We are committed to conducting reviews efficiently to minimize the time from submission to publication while maintaining the quality and rigor of the process.
   
• Transparency:
  We maintain transparency in the peer review process by providing authors with access to reviewer comments (while preserving reviewer anonymity) and ensuring that publication decisions are communicated clearly.
  Our peer review process is designed to maintain the highest standards of academic excellence, objectivity, and fairness. By engaging experts in the field and adhering to rigorous evaluation criteria, we aim to publish research that contributes significantly to the body of knowledge within the academic community. Authors, reviewers, and readers can trust in the robustness and credibility of our peer review process.