Peer Review Policy

Peer review supports independent scholarly assessment while protecting confidentiality, managing conflicts of interest and providing editors with evidence-based advice.

QES MedPharm Journal model

QES MedPharm Journal operates a double-anonymous peer-review model: author identities are concealed from reviewers and reviewer identities are concealed from authors during peer review. Manuscripts first undergo editorial screening for scope, completeness, ethics, reporting and basic quality. Submissions that proceed to external review are normally assessed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise; an additional reviewer may be invited when reports conflict or specialist input is required.

Reviewer selection and conflicts

Editors select reviewers for relevant expertise and independence. Reviewers must disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal or other relationships that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, impartiality and must decline or recuse themselves when a material conflict exists.

Confidentiality

Review invitations, manuscripts, supplementary files, reviewer reports and editorial discussions are confidential. Unpublished material must not be shared or uploaded to unauthorized third-party or generative-AI systems.

Editorial decisions

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Final acceptance, revision or rejection decisions are made by the authorized journal editor on the basis of scholarly merit, scope, methodological quality, ethics, reporting and the peer-review record.

Editor and board-member submissions

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial-board members or close collaborators must be handled independently by an alternative editor with no relevant conflict. The submitting editor or board member must not influence reviewer selection or the decision.

Appeals

Authors may appeal a decision through the published Complaints & Appeals process. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.