Peer Review Process

1. Once an article is submitted for review, it will be evaluated by journal staff to ensure it meets our technical requirements for submission.

2. Editors first review the submitted manuscript, called initial review by the editors. It will be evaluated whether the submitted manuscript is suitable for Medical Innovation based on aims and scope, similarity score by using Crosscheck-iThenticate, methodological flaw, readability of the articles, and adhering to the submitted paper template.

3. Furthermore, the manuscript will be sent to at least 2 anonymous reviewers (Single-Blind Peer-Review), which means only the reviewers are anonymous. More specifically, it means reviewers know the authors' names and backgrounds, but authors don't know those of the reviewers. The reviewers are external experts.

4. The anonymous reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses. Afterward, the editorial team meeting suggested the final decision on the revised manuscript by the authors.

4. Finally, the Editor-in-Chief will send the final decision to the corresponding author.

5. The accepted manuscript then continued to the copyediting and layout editing process to prepare the camera-ready paper.

 

Plagiarism Detection

Medical Innovation uses the Similarity Check service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate to provide editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism, a text similarity below 20% is acceptable by the journal.

The CrossRef Similarity Check uses iThenticate originality detection software to identify text similarities which may indicate plagiarism. It does this by comparing manuscripts with both a web repository and the CrossRef database.