The International Journal of Informational Integrative Medicine (IJIIM) employs a double-blind peer review (double-blind peer review) process to ensure maximum transparency, impartiality, and scientific quality of the published content.

1. Anonymization

Authors are required to upload their manuscripts without any identifying information (name, affiliation, acknowledgments, or references that could lead back to the author). The authors’ anonymity is preserved throughout the entire review process.

2. Selection of Reviewers

Review requests are sent to qualified colleagues based on the relevance of their expertise:

• Theoretical expertise: consistency with the article’s conceptual framework.
• Methodological expertise: appropriateness with respect to the research design and the analytical techniques used.
• Thematic expertise: specific experience in the disciplinary field.
• Geographical expertise: knowledge of the cultural or territorial context, where relevant.

The IJIIM maintains an extensive database of reviewers used to identify suitable reviewers. In addition, the editorial staff also contacts colleagues who are not (yet) registered in the database, thereby constantly expanding the pool of available reviewers.

3. Assignment and Review

• The Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to a Section Editor who is an expert in the article’s subject matter.
• The Section Editor selects at least two (2) independent, external reviewers, chosen based on their specific expertise and the absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or the content of the manuscript. Standard practice dictates that reviewers be external to the editorial board, ensuring maximum independence of judgment.
• Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript anonymously and independently, providing a detailed report with comments, suggestions, and a recommendation (acceptance, revision, or rejection).

4. Role of the Section Editor

The Section Editor coordinates the entire process: he or she collects and evaluates the reviewers’ reports, synthesizes their comments, and formulates a final recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. The Section Editor does not act as the sole reviewer, but rather supervises and synthesizes the opinions of the external reviewers, ensuring the objectivity of the evaluation.

5. Handling of Articles by Editorial Board Members

Since IJIIM is a journal managed by independent researchers, editorial board members are permitted to submit their own articles to the journal. To ensure maximum transparency and impartiality:

• When an author is a member of the editorial board, they are completely recused from all editorial duties related to that article.
• The responsibility for overseeing the peer review process is entrusted to a different Section Editor who has no professional or personal relationship with the author.
• Any conflicts of interest must be disclosed by the authors at the time of submission and, where applicable, indicated in the resulting publication.

6. Final Decision

• Based on the reviewers’ reports and the Area Editor’s recommendation, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:
• Acceptance (with or without minor revisions)
• Request for Major Revisions (the article is returned to the authors for substantial revisions and resubmitted for re-evaluation)
• Rejection
• The decision is communicated to the authors through the editorial office, accompanied by the reviewers’ reports and the Subject Editor’s recommendations.

7. Timelines and Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers and editors are required to promptly disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
• The journal is committed to ensuring prompt review times while maintaining the quality of the process.

8. Compliance with International Standards

IJIIM’s peer review process is aligned with international best practices (COPE, ICMJE) and the requirements for indexing in DOAJ and PubMed Central (PMC).