Journal of Reviews in Clinical Medicine employs double-blind peer review process implying both reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other. Upon receiving a new manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief briefly reviews the manuscript to verify its conformity with the journal’s aims, scope and style guidelines. If it is initially accepted, the manuscript will be placed in queue for being refereed by at least two reviewers.
Editor in Chief reviews the comments of the editors and reviewers and make a decision that may be: accept, minor revision, major revision or reject. It is unusual for an article to be accepted with no revision at this step. If revision is requested, the reviewers' comments will be sent to the authors for point by point response and revision of the article.
The whole review process depends on receiving referees comments and revising the manuscripts by the author based on these comments and may take 1.5 to 3 mounts. Upon receipt of the revised article from the author and after final approval by referees, final decision will be done by the editor in chief and notification letter will be sent to the corresponding author.
The following diagram shows peer review workflow in details.