Peer Review Process

The ASEAN Journal of Military and Preventive Medicine implements a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, integrity, and scientific contribution of all published manuscripts.

Review Model

The journal applies a Single-Blind Peer Review system in which the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors, while reviewers are aware of the identities of authors.

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed objectively based on academic merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical standards, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Office and Editor-in-Chief to determine:

• Suitability with the journal’s aims and scope
• Compliance with author guidelines and formatting requirements
• Originality and scientific quality
• Ethical compliance and research integrity
• Potential plagiarism using plagiarism detection software

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards or fall outside the journal scope may be rejected without external review.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts passing the initial editorial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript topic.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Scientific originality and novelty
• Methodological validity and reliability
• Relevance and significance of findings
• Ethical considerations
• Quality of analysis and interpretation
• Clarity, structure, and language quality
• Appropriateness of references and citations

Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations to assist authors in improving the quality of their manuscripts.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept Submission
• Minor Revisions Required
• Major Revisions Required
• Resubmit for Review
• Reject Submission

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Confidentiality and Ethical Standards

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts to unauthorized individuals.

Reviewers are expected to conduct reviews objectively, avoid personal criticism, and disclose any conflicts of interest that could influence their evaluations.

The journal follows ethical publishing principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and supports best practices recommended by international indexing standards, including DOAJ and Scopus.

Review Timeline

The journal strives to complete the peer-review process efficiently while maintaining high academic standards. The average review process typically takes between 4 to 8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript revisions.