Peer Review Policy

Global Journal of Forensic Pathology and Medicine (GJFPM)

The Global Journal of Forensic Pathology and Medicine (GJFPM) operates a double-blind peer review process in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed. Editorial decisions are based on independent reviewer evaluations and the assessment of the handling editor.

Review Model

  • Global Journal of Forensic Pathology and Medicine (GJFPM) employs a double-blind peer review system in which author and reviewer identities are concealed throughout the review process.
  • Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.
  • Additional reviewers may be invited when specialized forensic, medical, or interdisciplinary expertise is required.

Peer Review Process

  1. Manuscripts are initially screened by the editorial office for scope, completeness, originality, and compliance with journal policies.
  2. Submissions deemed suitable are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in forensic pathology, forensic medicine, or related disciplines.
  3. Reviewers provide detailed, constructive evaluations and recommendations.
  4. The handling editor assesses reviewer reports and formulates a decision recommendation.
  5. The Editor-in-Chief or a designated senior editor makes and communicates the final decision.

Selection of Reviewers

  • Reviewers are selected by the editorial team based on subject expertise, academic qualifications, and publication record.
  • Individuals with actual or potential conflicts of interest are not assigned to review the manuscript.
  • Authors may suggest potential reviewers; however, the final selection rests solely with the editorial team.
  • All manuscripts, including those submitted to special issues, are reviewed by independent experts from institutions other than the authors’ affiliations.

Review Criteria

Manuscripts submitted to GJFPM are evaluated based on the following criteria:

  • Originality, relevance, and scientific contribution to forensic pathology or forensic medicine
  • Methodological rigor and appropriateness of study design
  • Accuracy, clarity, and validity of results and interpretations
  • Ethical compliance and adherence to medico-legal standards
  • Quality of presentation, structure, and language
  • Appropriate citation practices and acknowledgment of prior work

Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions are made after careful consideration of reviewer evaluations. Possible decisions include:

  • Accept
  • Minor revisions required
  • Major revisions required
  • Reject

The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor.

Revisions

  • Authors must submit a detailed, point-by-point response addressing all reviewer comments.
  • Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of peer review when deemed necessary.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

  • All submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential.
  • Reviewers must not disclose, share, or use manuscript content for personal or professional purposes.
  • Editors and reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves where appropriate.

Ethical Oversight

Any ethical concerns identified during the peer review process are handled in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Malpractice Policy.

Global Journal of Forensic Pathology and Medicine (GJFPM) is committed to maintaining transparent editorial practices, rigorous peer review, and the highest standards of integrity in forensic and medico-legal publishing.