Editorial Statements 
 
 
  • NJLM strongly supports research that will benefit medical science and discourages the publication of articles that merely represent pre-established and repetitive facts. However, at times, the journal does allow publication of articles that may have been reported in literature but from a different region. This is with a dual aim, to promote medical publications and to recognize the fact that disease and disease behaviour may vary widely between populations.

  • NJLM provides services, if required by authors, in view of supporting them to write good quality articles. In return it charges nominal fees. Details of which can be found under author services.

  • The philosophy of publishers behind NJLM is to promote research publication from less privileged parts of the world. The publishers do not propose to earn profit from the journal services. Hence most services provided are at par or below the costs to the publishers.

  • NJLM welcomes and encourages authors who do not wish to use these services.

  • NJLM editorial board and publisher take proactive steps in remaining unbiased to authors who avail or do not avail paid services.

  • Under no circumstances / incentive will NJLM publish an article without merit and peer review.

  • The criteria for acceptance, format of manuscript and peer review process for authors who use or do not use paid services remains identical.

  • The time table of events after submission of an article detailed below refers to those authors who do not utilize the paid services of NJLM.

  • Acceptance and Rejection: The journal accepts good research which is well justified, well planned, appropriately designed which properly address the research question. The decision about manuscript is based on its importance, originality, clarity and relevance to the journal's scope and content. The reasons for rejection will be broadly followed in accordance to the principles described in a published manuscript by the editor in its sister journals. (click).The final decision for acceptance and rejection of manuscript will be taken by Journal's Editorial Team.

 
Editorial & Peer Review Process

Time table

The Editorial board at NJLM follows a time table which is based on it's current workload and as far as possible tries to adhere to it.
     
1 Time from receiving manuscript to initial (provisional) approval/disapproval by editorial board 7 days
2 Time from approval to completion of peer review 10-13 weeks
3 Time for authors to send back the correction or explanations to comments by peer reviewers 3 weeks
4 Time for final acceptance by the editorial board based on peer review process 2 weeks
5 Time for authors to send in the final corrected draft 2 weeks
6 Time for NJLM to set up the article in its format 2 weeks
7 Time for authors to do the final proof reading 1 weeks
8 Time for NJLM to do the proof read changes 1 weeks
9 Time for NJLM to Publish the Online First version ( Only if time to Final publication is more than 15 days ) (Only if requested by Authors - Paid Service) 1-2 weeks

The manuscripts will be reviewed for possible publication on the understanding that they are being submitted only to one journal at one time and have not been published, simultaneously submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere.

The following is the editorial workflow that every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes during the course of the peer-review process.

The entire editorial workflow is performed using the online NJLM Pre Publishing Manuscript Management System. Once a manuscript is submitted, the manuscript is assessed by a Screening Editor for originality of work, Serious scientific flaws and plagiarism.

Thereafter the article is handed over to the Editor based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. They then assess the article and inform the author if the article has been accepted for peer review or has been rejected. If rejected, the corresponding author will be informed via an email.

If the Editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, they assigns the manuscript to a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers submit their reports in the standard format ( provided to them by the NJLM ) to the Editor and also grade the article.

  • Exceptional quality article

  • High quality article

  • Good quality article

  • Fair quality article

  • Unacceptable in present form

  • Unacceptable in any form

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can makes one of the following editorial recommendations:

  • Publish Unaltered

  • Accept after Minor Changes

  • Consider after Major Changes

  • Reject

There after the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required changes as suggested by the reviewers.

The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.

The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority in rejecting any manuscript because of inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal.

The peer-review process is double blinded, i.e., the reviewers do not know who the authors of the manuscript are and the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer-reviewers are.

A due acknowledgment for the researchers who have performed the peer-review process for one or more of the  manuscripts in the past is made on the journal website. Without the significant contributions made by these researchers, the publication of the journal would not be possible.

A Note on Withdrawal of Manuscripts

Some authors request withdrawal of manuscript after submission. If the withdrawal is done within the time span when the article is with Editor, and for a genuine reason like problems discovered in data etc , author is allowed the withdraw the manuscript without any penalty.

If the author withdraws manuscript any time after the manuscript has been sent to peer review till the final decision, then unless there are compelling reasons, the request is not entertained without an penalty. this penalty may be in form of payment to journal for its time and resources spent.

A Note on Corrections: Post Publication of Manuscripts

After  internal assessment and external peer review the articles are published. They then are open to post publication peer review. In the rare instance of a change required post publication then it is corrected in the online version and notified as last updated on.

A Note on Tables and Figures

NJLM started as an online journal later went into print. From beginning it makes image for both tables and Figures. Since technically both are similar hence we label them in similar fashion and follow a uniform pattern, which is less cumbersome for those page setting the article. ( example Table/Fig 1, Table/Fig 2......)

A Note on NJLM Pre Publishing

This is a comprehensive manuscript submission portal which address full needs of Author, Reviewers, Editors as well as Providers ( page setter, English editors, proof readers..) of NJLM. This was developed in house tailored to the needs of NJLM as a long term solution to growing submissions.

 
 
Last Updated : 10 Oct 2015 First Published : 1 June 2012