Peer-review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers’ experts in the field.
All of the journal’s content is subjected to peer review.
The submitted manuscripts will be considered for publication if they receive favorable reports from specialists outside the publishing institution and the editorial board. At least two anonymous referees will evaluate the unsigned manuscripts submitted for publication to AJGH.
This journal uses a double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.
Decisions on articles and book reviews submitted are normally made within 6 weeks. If the manuscript has not been accepted or needs revision, the author will be provided with a report indicating the reasons for non-acceptance, or the changes required for its publication.
Even in case of a positive evaluation, manuscripts not conforming to the author guidelines will be returned to the authors for further revision.
Judgments are objective.
Reviewers have no conflict of interest.
Reviewers point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.
Reviewed articles should be treated confidentially.
The publication process is consisting of the following steps. The ultimate objectives of this process are Quality, Quality, and Quality. The full process will be completed expected within 5-7 days.
After receiving the manuscript we will send a confirmation e-mail to the author.
Manuscripts will be checked by Plagiarism checker software.
Primary quality will be checked by the Editor.
The manuscript will be sent for double-blinded review.
Based on the double-blinded review, the editors will make a decision and the decision will be communicated to the author. Decisions can be three types like accepted without revision, resubmit with major/minor revisions, rejected.