Review Process

IJERMES follows a rigorous and transparent review process to ensure the quality and integrity of the research it publishes. Our peer-review system adheres to the highest academic and ethical standards, fostering fair and constructive evaluations.

Our editorial team evaluates the manuscript for scope, originality, formatting compliance, and adherence to submission guidelines.
Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be rejected outright or returned to authors for corrections.
A plagiarism check is conducted using advanced detection tools.
The manuscript is assigned to two or more expert reviewers in the relevant field.
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, research background, and experience in the manuscript’s subject area.
The journal follows a double-blind review process, where both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed to ensure unbiased evaluation.
The GHP Editorial Board will provide detailed comments and recommendations, which may fall into the following categories wich will be share to the author in mail.
  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted with no or minimal revisions.
  • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor corrections before publication.
  • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant changes and resubmission for further review.
  • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication.
Authors must address reviewer comments, submit revised manuscripts within specified timeframes, and provide detailed response documents. Revised manuscripts may be sent back for reevaluation.
The accepted manuscript undergoes copyediting and proofreading to ensure accuracy and consistency.
The final version is published online and made accessible as part of the journal’s open-access policy.

Authors can appeal editorial decisions or lodge complaints about the review process by contacting the editorial office. All appeals will be handled in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.