• Submission of Paper

The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal. This is via an online system (https://ijmapr.areeo.ac.ir/).

• Editorial Office Assessment

The journal checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to ensure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point. In case of non-compliance with Journal format, it will be returned to the author to revise it, and if approved, it will be sent to the chief editor.

• Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further. If the paper is suitable enough, it will be sent to one of the members of the editorial boards (as Associate Editor) for further review.

•  Evaluation by one of the editorial boards (as Associate Editor)

One of the editorial boards (Associate Editor) will review the article. If it does not fit the goals and objectives of the article, it will be rejected, and if approved, at least 3 reviewers will be introduced to the chief editor to continue the process.

• Invitation to Reviewers

The chief editor sends invitations to individuals she believes would be appropriate (at least 2) reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained – commonly, this is 2.

• Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline. If they accept the arbitration, they will receive the full text of the article and the arbitration questionnaire.

•  Review is Conducted

The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times and take notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it, or with a revision request (usually flagged as either major or minor) before reconsidering.

•  Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The chief editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the chief editor may invite an additional reviewer to provide an additional opinion.

•  The Decision is Communicated

The editor sends the author a decision, including any relevant reviewer comments. At this stage, the article may be rejected or sent to the corresponding author for revision.

• Revise the paper by the corresponding author and resend it

The author will improve the article according to the reviewers's comments. After revising the article, the author submits the revised article again.

•  Review of the revised article

The editor and members of the editorial board will review the revised article. In conclusion, it will be sent to one of the reviewers for re-review.

• Final steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an letter letting them know the outcome of their review. If the paper was returned for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version unless they have opted out of further participation.