Peer Review Policy

Georgian Medical Journal  ·  Editorial Policy Peer Review Policy

Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG)  ·  Double-anonymised  ·  COPE  ·  ICMJE

The Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) operates a double-anonymised (double-blind) peer review process. Reviewers are not informed of the authors' identities, and authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities.

All submissions are initially assessed by the editorial team for suitability, scope, and basic methodological quality. Manuscripts that pass this initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

---

Review Criteria

— Scientific quality and originality — Methodological rigour — Ethical standards and compliance — Relevance to GMJ's scope and readership

---

Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned handling editor makes the final decision based on reviewers' comments and recommendations. The journal ensures that all peer review is conducted in a fair, unbiased, and confidential manner.

---

Reviewer Guidelines For detailed reviewer instructions, criteria, report structure, ethical flags, and the sample review form. Open Guidelines →