The Journal of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine applies a double-blind peer review system to ensure academic quality, objectivity, and transparency.

Review Model

• Type of review: Double-blind peer review
• Number of reviewers: At least two reviewers per manuscript
• Final decision authority: Editor-in-Chief
• Typical review timeline: Approximately 4-8 weeks (may vary depending on revision rounds)

Review Workflow

Step 1: Submission
Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system.

Step 2: Initial Editorial Screening (Desk Review)
The editorial office checks for completeness, compliance with author guidelines, relevance to scope, and required ethical documentation. Manuscripts may be returned for technical correction before peer review.

Ethical Compliance Screening Before entering the peer review process, the editorial office verifies that manuscripts involving human participants or animals include appropriate ethical approval documentation. Manuscripts lacking clear evidence of IRB or ethics committee approval, where required, may be returned to authors for clarification or may not proceed to external review. For research involving older persons or vulnerable groups, the editorial office may request additional confirmation regarding informed consent and participant protection prior to reviewer assignment.

Step 3: Plagiarism Screening
All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using plagiarism-detection software before being sent to reviewers.

Step 4: Reviewer Assignment
The handling editor assigns at least two reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers must declare conflicts of interest.

Step 5: Double-Blind Review
Reviewer identities are concealed from authors, and author identities are concealed from reviewers. Reviewers evaluate scientific rigor, originality, clarity, methodology, and ethical compliance.

Step 6: Editorial Decision
Based on reviewer reports, the editor issues one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

Step 7: Revision and Re-evaluation
Authors submit revised manuscripts with point-by-point responses. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers if necessary.

Step 8: Reference Verification
Before final acceptance, references may be checked for accuracy and authenticity with support from the journal’s academic librarian.

Step 9: Final Acceptance and Publication
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. Accepted manuscripts proceed to editing, proofreading, and publication according to the journal schedule.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

All manuscript materials and reviewer reports are treated as confidential. Editors and reviewers must declare conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when appropriate.