The Believers Medical Journal (BeMJ) uses a structured Peer Review Form to guide expert reviewers in conducting a thorough and consistent assessment of submitted medical research. Under the journal's double-blind peer-review model, this evaluation framework supports impartial, constructive, and evidence-based feedback across the manuscript categories considered by Believers Medical Journal (BeMJ).
Reviewers assess scientific validity, originality, clinical relevance, methodological rigor, statistical analysis, and ethical compliance. The evaluation process is informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations, and the transparency principles reflected in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) criteria.
Assigned peer reviewers evaluate submissions across eight core scientific, ethical, and technical areas:
All manuscript files, unpublished data, supplementary materials, and peer-review communications must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not copy, distribute, disclose, or upload confidential manuscript content to public or unauthorized generative artificial intelligence tools or other third-party systems.
Peer-review recommendations are advisory and assist the Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor in reaching the final editorial decision.
Reviewers who identify suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, undisclosed competing interests, or other research-integrity concerns should report them directly and confidentially to the Editorial Office in accordance with journal policy and relevant COPE guidance.
The official Peer Review Form is available through the download link above and may also be provided to invited reviewers through the journal's online submission system with the manuscript review request. Reviewers may submit confidential comments for the editor and separate constructive comments intended for the authors.