Peer Review Process

 

The IJRDO – Journal of Law and Cyber Crime adheres to the strict protocol of a double-blind peer review process to guarantee the scientific quality, clinical and ethical relevance of all articles published.

1. First Editorial Evaluation

Each manuscript is subjected to scrutiny by the editorial office to check:

  • ● Applicability to goals and objectives.
  • ● Observation of author guidelines.
  • ● Uniqueness and morale.

Papers failing these may be rejected without external scrutiny.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Articles successfully screened are submitted to two or more separate expert reviewers in pericardiology or cardiovascular medicine.

The identity of the author and the reviewer have been hidden to have an objective and unbiased assessment.

3. Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

● Originality and clinical value in science
● Methodological rigor and research design
● Precision of analysis and interpretation
● Clinical practice and pericardial diseases
● Legibility, structure and design
● Ethical compliance and patient safety

4. Editorial Decision

Accept Minor Revisions Major Revisions Reject

Authors get critical feedback that is elaborate and constructive in order to revise on their manuscript.

5. Revision and Re-evaluation: The handling editor reviews revised manuscripts and sends them back to reviewers when deemed necessary.

6. Final Decision: Based on editorial judgment and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the ultimate decision about whether or not to publish.

7. Timeliness & Transparency

We place great emphasis on timely and transparent review procedures without compromising the quality of clinical and scientific integrity.

8. Ethical Responsibilities

  • ● Confidentiality
  • ● Disclosure of conflict of interest
  • ● Professionalism and objectivity