Peer Review Policy: Ensuring Scholarly Rigour

The peer review policy of JRTM is the cornerstone of maintaining high standards in academic publishing. It outlines the process by which submitted manuscripts are evaluated by experts in the field, guaranteeing the quality, originality, and significance of published research. 

Key elements of our peer review policy is as follows:

• Review model: Double-anonymised (reviewers do not know authors’ identities; authors do not know reviewers’ identities). The journal will not use the term “editorial review” to describe the normal review process; any editorial desk checks are separate (see below).
• Editorial triage (desk check): Upon submission the Editor-in-Chief screens manuscripts for scope, plagiarism, and basic formatting. Manuscripts that pass editorial triage are sent for external peer review. This editorial triage is not a replacement for peer review.
• External reviewers: Manuscripts are normally evaluated by two independent external reviewers with relevant expertise who are external to the journal’s editorial board where possible. Reviewers are expected to declare any conflicts of interest and to follow our reviewer guidelines. 
• Reviewer selection: Reviewers are selected on the basis of expertise, and the editors avoid using reviewers who have conflicts of interest or close collaborative relationships with the authors.
• Decision process: The handling editor synthesises reviewer reports and makes a recommendation; Editors consider reviewers' reports and their own assessment to make final decisions:
• Accept: Manuscript is ready for publication (rare at this stage).
• Revisions Requested: Authors address identified weaknesses and resubmit the manuscript.
• Reject: Manuscript is not suitable for publication, with detailed feedback provided to the authors.
•  In case of conflicting reviews the editor may seek a third external opinion.

• Appeals Process: The journals allow authors to appeal an editorial decision with justification.

Review and Publication Timelines

• The Journal of Research in Traditional Medicine (JRTM) aims to provide authors with a timely and fair review process.
• Average time to first decision: approximately 5–8 weeks from submission.
• Time for Revision of manuscript post peer review : 15 days 
• Average time from acceptance to online publication: within 2–3 weeks after decision.

Last Updated on 09/12/2025