Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

Birat Journal of Health Sciences (BJHS), published by Birat Medical College and Teaching Hospital, Nepal, is committed to maintaining scientific quality, academic integrity, fairness, and transparency through a rigorous double-blind peer-review process. All submitted scholarly manuscripts undergo initial editorial assessment and independent peer review before acceptance for publication.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Each submitted manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to determine whether it:

  • Falls within the aims and scope of BJHS.

  • Meets the journal's submission and formatting requirements.

  • Demonstrates originality, scientific quality, and clinical relevance.

  • Complies with research ethics and publication standards.

  • Includes ethical approval and informed consent documentation where applicable.

  • Meets plagiarism and textual similarity requirements.

Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

BJHS follows a double-blind peer-review system, ensuring that authors' identities remain concealed from reviewers and reviewers' identities remain concealed from authors.

Authors must remove identifying information from manuscripts prepared for peer review.

This process promotes impartiality, confidentiality, and objective scientific evaluation.

3. Number and Independence of Reviewers

Each manuscript selected for external review is forwarded to an associate editor and two reviewers with relevant expertise.

Reviewers are selected from national and international academic and healthcare communities.

Reviewers must:

  • Possess appropriate expertise in the manuscript's subject area.

  • Provide independent and objective evaluations.

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

  • Submit constructive and evidence-based recommendations.

4. Reviewer Selection

The Editor-in-Chief or designated associate editor selects reviewers based on their qualifications, research experience, clinical expertise, and relevant scholarly contributions.

Reviewers with potential conflicts of interest must decline the assignment or disclose the conflict to the editorial team.

5. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts according to:

  • Originality and contribution to medical knowledge.

  • Relevance to health sciences and clinical practice.

  • Scientific accuracy and methodological quality.

  • Appropriateness of research design and statistical analysis.

  • Reliability and interpretation of findings.

  • Compliance with ethical research standards.

  • Clarity, organization, and presentation.

  • Accuracy and relevance of references.

  • Overall suitability for publication in BJHS.

6. Confidentiality

All manuscripts, supplementary documents, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential.

Reviewers must not disclose unpublished research findings, share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals, or use confidential information for personal or professional benefit.

7. Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to disclose any financial, professional, institutional, or personal relationships that may influence the review process.

Reviewers or editors with relevant conflicts of interest must withdraw from the evaluation or editorial decision.

8. Reviewer Recommendations

Following evaluation, reviewers may recommend:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revisions

  • Major Revisions

  • Reject

All recommendations must be supported by constructive scientific comments and clear academic justification.

9. Conflicting Reviewer Reports

When reviewers provide substantially different recommendations, the handling editor may request further clarification or appoint an additional independent reviewer.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or designated editor.

10. Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests must submit:

  • A revised manuscript.

  • A point-by-point response to reviewers' comments.

  • Explanations for any recommendations not incorporated into the revised manuscript.

Revised manuscripts may undergo additional assessment by reviewers or the editorial team.

Authors must submit revisions within the deadline communicated by the journal.

11. Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor after considering reviewer reports, scientific merit, originality, methodological quality, and ethical compliance.

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly quality without discrimination based on nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or financial circumstances.

12. Peer Review Timeline

The peer-review process at BJHS generally takes five to six weeks, depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and revision requirements.

The editorial office communicates decisions and relevant anonymous reviewer comments to the corresponding author.

13. Ethical Concerns During Review

Reviewers must immediately report suspected research or publication misconduct, including:

  • Plagiarism or duplicate publication.

  • Data fabrication or falsification.

  • Research involving humans or animals without appropriate ethical approval.

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

  • Citation manipulation.

  • Misrepresentation of scientific findings.

Such concerns are evaluated by the editorial team in accordance with applicable publication ethics standards.

Birat Journal of Health Sciences (BJHS) is committed to ensuring that all published research meets recognized standards of scientific excellence, ethical responsibility, and evidence-based medical scholarship.