EDITORIAL PROCESS

The Journal of Nepal Medical Association follows a multi-tier editorial workflow system with clear separation of technical handling, editorial decision-making, and publication authority. The process is implemented under the principles of internationally recognized publication ethics, including those of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

1. Manuscript Submission and Technical Screening

All manuscripts are submitted through the OJS system, supported by email-based tracking and internal workflow tools.

Initial handling is performed by editorial staff, including the Clinical Research Officer and Research Assistant. This stage includes:

• Verification of manuscript format and compliance with author guidelines
• Completeness check of submission documents
• Administrative screening of submissions

Manuscripts that do not meet technical requirements may be rejected at this stage as technical rejection, without scientific review.

2. Manuscript Assignment and Tracking

Manuscripts that pass technical screening are assigned by Managing Editors to Section Editors and Associate Editors.

Managing Editors are responsible for:

• Assignment of manuscripts to editorial teams
• Monitoring manuscript progress across editorial stages
• Ensuring workflow continuity across sections

Associate Editors function as an intermediate supervisory layer between Managing Editors and Section Editors, ensuring coordination and oversight of manuscript handling across sections.

Section Editors are responsible for manuscript handling within assigned sections under the supervision of Associate Editors.

3. Editorial Desk Review (Scientific Screening)

Editorial desk review is conducted by Editors under the oversight of the Editor-in-Chief and the Deputy Editor-in-Chief. Editor-in-Chief and the Deputy Editor-in-Chief provides advisory input and co-approval in selected or complex manuscripts.

This stage includes:

• Evaluation of scope relevance
• Initial scientific assessment
• Preliminary ethical screening
• Assessment of suitability for peer review

Based on reviewer reports and editorial evaluation, manuscripts may be:

• Sent for peer review, or
• Rejected at the editorial stage

Editorial rejection decisions at this stage may be taken by Section Editors, Associate Editors, or Managing Editors under the oversight of the Deputy Editor-in-Chief and Editor-in-Chief.

4. Peer Review Process (Editorial Management)

Manuscripts approved for peer review are managed by Section Editors and Associate Editors.

Their responsibilities include:

• Coordinating the peer review process
• Ensuring timely completion of reviews
• Implementing editorial instructions and workflow decisions

They do not act as independent decision-makers but manage manuscript flow based on editorial decisions.

5. Ethical Oversight and Escalation

Any editorial member who identifies potential ethical concerns may initiate escalation to the Ethical Subcommittee.

The Ethical Subcommittee:

• Reviews ethical concerns independently
• Reports findings to the Editorial Board when necessary

This ensures structured ethical governance within the editorial system.

6. Final Publication Decision

The final and binding decision on publication of all manuscripts rests with the Editor-in-Chief, based on editorial evaluation, peer review input, and ethical considerations where applicable.