The Macedonian Journal of Anaesthesia (MJA) applies a double-blind peer review process to manuscripts categorized as Scientific Articles.
-
Both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review.
-
Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers (domestic and/or international experts) with appropriate expertise.
Review Process
-
Initial editorial screening – The Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editors assess whether the manuscript fits the scope of the journal and meets basic ethical and technical requirements.
-
Double-blind review – Suitable manuscripts are sent to external reviewers, who assess originality, scientific quality, methodology, ethics, and clarity.
-
Decision – Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial team decides to accept, request minor/major revision, or reject the manuscript.
-
Revisions – The revised manuscript, together with responses to reviewers’ comments, is submitted by the corresponding author. If necessary, the revised version may be re-evaluated by reviewers.
The final decision on acceptance, categorization and order of publication is made by the Editorial Board.
MJA follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding peer review ethics and integrity.
Peer Review Transparency and Additional Policies
The journal operates a double-blind peer review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process.
Authors may suggest potential reviewers; however, the final selection of reviewers is made by the editorial team, and suggested reviewers are subject to editorial approval.
Supplementary materials submitted with manuscripts may be considered as part of the submission; however, they are reviewed only insofar as they are relevant to the manuscript and are not necessarily subject to independent peer review.
Peer review is used to evaluate scientific quality and suitability for publication; however, acceptance of manuscripts is not guaranteed and is based on reviewer recommendations and editorial assessment.
All reviews are conducted by external experts independent of the editorial team.