Once a manuscript is submitted to Journal, the editorial office conducts a preliminary check with respect to plagiarism. If plagiarized content is less
than 15%, the author may be asked to revise the manuscript. If substantial plagiarism (>15%) is noticed in manuscript content or part thereof, the
manuscript is straight away rejected. IJMBS reviewers also conduct the plagiarism check in a similar manner and can make recommendations
whether or not to consider the manuscript further. Even after acceptance of the manuscript or post-publication, if the plagiarism/duplication/republication of already published work in any language is observed, the case is referred to the IJMBS executive board who conducts a full inquiry
giving due opportunity to the concerned authors. In case of violation of provisions contained in author agreement or of grave and unethical
misconduct as a researcher with respect to publishing the work, the published article may be retracted with no refund/adjustment of manuscript
handling fee under intimation to authors’ institution/funding agency.
1. All the reviewers are requested that before accepting to review a manuscript they should ensure the following:
i. The manuscript is within their area of expertise.
ii. They can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.
2. All the reviewers should declare their conflict of interest and can decline the review if conflicts exist.
3 IJCSMR follows the blind review process so the manuscript and the review process should remain confidential during and after the review process.
Reviewers should ensure it on their part.
4. Review of a manuscript should be fair so reviews should be honest and should not influenced by:-
The origin of the manuscript
i. Religious, political or cultural viewpoint of the author
ii. Gender, race, ethnicity or citizenry of the author
5. In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on the criteria decided by Journal.
6. Reviewers should only accept manuscript that they are confident that they can dedicate appropriate time in reviewing. Thus, reviewers should
review and return manuscripts in a timely manner.
1. Authorship credit should be based on the substantial contribution in conducting the study. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the
collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship. Each contributor should have
participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. The order of naming the contributors should
be based on the relative contribution of the contributor to the study and preparation of the manuscript. Once the manuscript submitted, the order
cannot be changed without written consent of all the contributors.
2. Only those who have published substantial work in a particular field can write a review article. A short summary of the work completed by the
contributor(s) in the field of review should accompany the manuscript.
3. Each of the authors must complete and submit an Authorship Form.
4. All the received articles will be reviewed critically for important intellectual content and after this final approved version will be published.