Plagiarism Policy

JMMC screens every submitted manuscript for plagiarism using Turnitin.

A manuscript's overall similarity index must not exceed 19%, and similarity to any single source must not exceed 5%. Manuscripts exceeding this threshold are returned to the corresponding author for revision and re-screened before proceeding further.

What counts as plagiarism
This includes, but is not limited to: verbatim or near-verbatim copying of another author's work without citation; copying figures, equations, or data without attribution; and self-plagiarism, the substantial, uncredited reuse of an author's own previously published work.

JMMC does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Confirmed instances may result in rejection, retraction, or referral to the author's institution, in line with COPE guidelines.

 

Peer Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to JMMC undergo double-blind peer review: the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the process.

Process

1. On submission, manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using Turnitin (see Plagiarism Policy).
2. Manuscripts that pass screening undergo an initial editorial review to confirm fit with JMMC's scope and basic formatting requirements.
3. Manuscripts are sent to at least two independent subject-matter reviewers for double-blind peer review.
4. Reviewer feedback is communicated to authors, who respond point-by-point within a defined period.
5. A final decision is made once reviewers are satisfied with the revised manuscript.

Manuscripts are accepted based on their significance, originality, and validity. Where an article is accepted, editorial revisions may be made to aid clarity, without altering its meaning.

This process is governed by a defined internal editorial Standard Operating Procedure, followed consistently for every submission.

All manuscripts are submitted and reviewed entirely through JMMC's Open Journal System — no physical copies are required.

Reviewers may not use AI-assisted technologies while conducting review, in order to protect the confidentiality of unpublished work.

 

Submissions from editors, board members and the publisher

Manuscripts written or co-written by the Editor-in-Chief, the Managing Editor, an editorial board member, a member of the editorial office, or a senior officer of Muhammad Foundation Trust or Ibn-e-Sina University are handled by an independent handling editor. Editors and board members cannot influence the review or the decision on their own submissions.

The handling editor is a board member or an external guest editor with no conflict with the authors. The handling editor does not work under the direction of any author in the editorial structure. If the Editor-in-Chief is an author, the Managing Editor appoints the handling editor. If both are authors, a board member with no conflict does so.

The handling editor assigns at least two independent reviewers who have no ties to the authors or to the conflicted editor. Review is double-blind and follows the same standards as every other submission.

The conflicted person has no access to the submission record, the reviewers’ identities, the reports or any discussion of the decision. Anyone with administrator access to the journal system who is an author must not open the submission. The conflicted person learns the outcome only as an author, when the decision is sent to the authors. The published article carries a note naming the independent handling editor.