Peer-Review Process

IMCC Journal of Science employs a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, ensuring an unbiased and impartial evaluation. In this process, the identities of both the reviewer and the author remain confidential. The editorial board meticulously selects qualified referees with expertise in the specific field of the paper under review, guaranteeing a thorough and insightful assessment.

Preliminary Assessment

Before submitting a paper for peer review, it should meet the following requirements:

Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope
Compliance with the stylistic and bibliographic guidelines outlined in the Author Guidelines
Readability score of at least 80%
Similarity index not exceeding 10%

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria will be rejected outright. All authors will be informed about the results of the preliminary assessment. Passing the preliminary assessment only indicates that the paper is ready for the double-blind peer review process. It does not guarantee acceptance for publication. Authors are strongly encouraged to use licensed software for plagiarism detection and to conduct thorough spelling and grammar checks before submitting their papers. This will ensure a smooth and efficient review process.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts undergo thorough evaluation by a minimum of two external reviewers and one internal reviewer:

External Reviewers: These experts are unaffiliated with the journal and hold established credibility in the relevant field. They are carefully selected for their expertise to ensure a fair and objective assessment.
Internal Reviewer: A member of the editorial board with expertise matching the subject area of the submitted paper provides an additional internal perspective.

To ensure impartiality, reviewers are bound by strict confidentiality agreements. They are prohibited from disclosing any details of the work to colleagues or anyone outside the review process. Ethical guidelines set by the journal (see Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Policy) further guide reviewers’ conduct. The review process strives for timeliness, with feedback typically delivered within three weeks. In some cases, due to the depth of analysis required, reviews may take two to three months. Patience is appreciated during this process. All reviewer comments are carefully considered by the Chief Editor before the editorial decision is communicated to the authors. Acceptance is contingent upon receiving favorable endorsements from at least two reviewers. Possible decisions include:

Accepted with No Revisions
Accepted with Minor Revisions
Accepted with Major Revisions
Rejected

IMCC Journal of Science

The Official Peer-Reviewed Journal of Iligan Medical Center College
ISSN Print: 2783-0357 | ISSN Online: 2783-0365