Overview
The Journal of Fatima Jinnah Institute of Dental Sciences (JFJIDS) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic integrity, originality, and scholarly quality. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated fairly and impartially by subject-matter experts in dental and oral health sciences.

Types of Peer Review
JFJIDS uses a double-blind review model, where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other, eliminating bias and maintaining objectivity.

Review Process Steps

• Initial Editorial Screening: Submissions are screened by the editorial office to ensure compliance with the journal’s scope, formatting, and ethical guidelines.

• Plagiarism Check: Manuscripts are checked using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate).

• Assignment to Reviewers: Two to three independent experts in the relevant field are invited to review each manuscript.

• Review Timeframe: Reviewers are expected to submit evaluations within 2 to 4 weeks.

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope

• Originality and contribution to dental research

• Methodological rigor and validity

• Clarity and coherence of writing

• Proper referencing and adherence to ethical standards

Editorial Decision
Based on reviewers’ feedback, the editorial team may:

• Accept the manuscript

• Accept with minor revisions

• Request major revisions

• Reject the manuscript

Authors receive consolidated reviewer feedback along with the editor’s decision and suggestions for improvement.

Revision and Resubmission
Authors invited to revise must submit a revised manuscript with a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments within the specified deadline (usually 2–3 weeks). The revised manuscript may be reassessed by the same reviewers or the editorial board.

Reviewer Anonymity and Confidentiality
All manuscripts and review reports are confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose manuscript details outside the peer review process.

Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:

• Provide constructive, unbiased, and timely feedback

• Declare any conflict of interest

• Maintain confidentiality

• Report unethical practices, such as plagiarism or data fabrication

Appeals and Complaints
Authors who disagree with a decision may appeal in writing to the editorial office with a detailed justification. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editorial board member.

Recognition of Reviewers
JFJIDS acknowledges the contributions of peer reviewers by providing certificates of reviewing and, with consent, listing reviewers annually on the journal’s website.