For Reviewer
The Academic International Journal of Medical Sciences (AIJMS) welcomes qualified scholars and researchers to join its international panel of peer reviewers. Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the scientific quality, credibility, and ethical integrity of the journal.
Why Review for AIJMS
- Contribute to the advancement of medical and health sciences
- Enhance academic and professional service records
- Receive official reviewer certificates upon request
- Gain recognition for reviewer contributions (with consent)
Eligibility Criteria
Prospective reviewers should meet the following criteria:
- Hold a doctoral degree or be an established researcher in a relevant medical or health science discipline
- Have demonstrated academic expertise through publications in peer-reviewed journals
- Possess research interests aligned with the aims and scope of AIJMS
- Be committed to ethical, objective, and timely peer review practices
How to Become a Reviewer
Researchers interested in serving as reviewers must register through the journal’s online submission system.
Reviewer Registration Steps
- Visit the reviewer registration page: https://AIJMS.aipublishers.org/index.php/AIJMS/user/register
- Complete the registration form with accurate personal and academic details
- Select the option: “Yes, I would like to be contacted with requests to review submissions to this journal.”
- Clearly specify your Reviewing Interests, including subject areas and methodological expertise
- Submit the form and keep your reviewer profile up to date
Reviewer Selection and Assignment
- Reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors based on expertise and stated reviewing interests
- Review invitations are issued according to manuscript relevance and reviewer availability
- Reviewers may accept or decline invitations based on expertise, workload, or conflicts of interest
Reviewer Responsibilities and Ethics
- Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
- Assess manuscripts for originality, scientific rigor, clarity, and relevance
- Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscript content
- Offer respectful and professional feedback to improve manuscript quality
Manuscript Evaluation Criteria
- Originality: Contribution of new knowledge or insights
- Methodological rigor: Appropriateness and clarity of methods
- Relevance: Alignment with the journal’s aims and scope
- Clarity and structure: Organization and academic writing quality
- References: Accuracy, relevance, and currency of citations
The official reviewer evaluation form, integrated into the journal management system, is available at: https://aipublishers.org/wp-content/uploads/Review-Form.pdf
Confidentiality and Anonymity
- All manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential
- Reviewers must not share manuscript content or contact authors directly
- Unpublished material must not be used for personal research
Conflict of Interest Policy
- Reviewers must declare and avoid personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest
- Conflicts may include institutional affiliation, recent collaboration, or any relationship that may affect impartiality
- Manuscripts with conflicts must be declined
Overview of the Peer Review Process
Type of Peer Review
AIJMS employs a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed to promote objectivity and minimize bias.
Initial Editorial Screening
All submissions undergo an initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor to evaluate scope, originality, formatting compliance, scientific quality, and ethical standards.
Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using Turnitin or similar software. Responsible and transparent use of AI-assisted tools is assessed in accordance with international publishing ethics.
Reviewer Reports and Recommendations
Reviewers are asked to provide detailed reports and recommend one of the following decisions:
- Accept without revision
- Accept with minor revisions
- Major revisions required (revise and resubmit)
- Reject
Editorial Decision and Revision
Final decisions are made by the editorial team based on reviewer reports and journal objectives. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.
Peer Review Timeline
- Initial editorial screening: 1–2 weeks
- Peer review stage: 4–8 weeks
- Revision and final decision: dependent on the extent of revisions
Ethical Standards and Complaints
Editors and reviewers adhere to COPE and international medical publishing standards. Ethical concerns, appeals, or complaints related to peer review are handled transparently by the editorial board.


