The Bangkok Medical Journal uses double-blind peer review to support the quality, integrity, and scientific relevance of published articles. The editorial workflow and estimated processing times are outlined below.

Editorial Workflow

Manuscripts may be returned for correction or rejected during the initial assessment. Following peer review, manuscripts may be accepted, returned for revision, or rejected. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review and further revision before a final decision is made. Only accepted manuscripts proceed to production.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system on ThaiJO. Submissions should comply with the current Author Guidelines and include all required documents. Authors should remove identifying information from files intended for double-blind review.

2. Initial Editorial Assessment and Plagiarism Screening

All submissions undergo an initial editorial assessment for journal scope, article type, completeness, formatting, originality, ethical compliance, and scientific suitability. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for correction or rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment undergo plagiarism screening using iThenticate. A similarity score above 20% prompts editorial assessment but does not, by itself, establish plagiarism. The editors assess the nature and context of overlapping text before deciding whether clarification, revision, or further action is required.

Estimated timeframe: Approximately 1–2 weeks. Incomplete submissions or manuscripts requiring preliminary corrections may take longer.

3. Reviewer Invitation and Confirmation

The editorial team identifies and invites independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. Reviewer selection takes into account subject knowledge, availability, and potential conflicts of interest.

Estimated timeframe: Approximately 1–2 weeks. Manuscripts addressing highly specialized topics may require additional time to identify suitable experts and obtain their agreement to review. Further invitations may be necessary when invited reviewers decline or are unavailable.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

Eligible manuscripts undergo double-blind peer review. Normally, at least three independent reviewers evaluate each manuscript; the number may vary according to the subject matter and complexity. Authors and reviewers do not receive identifying information about one another.

Reviewers assess originality, methodological quality, ethical conduct, accuracy, clarity, clinical or scientific relevance, and whether the conclusions are supported by the evidence.

5. Author Revision and Reassessment

Reviewer comments are communicated to authors without disclosure of reviewer identities. Authors invited to revise must submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response addressing every comment or explaining why a suggested change was not made. The revision deadline is communicated with the editorial decision.

Revised manuscripts may be reassessed by the editors or returned to the reviewers. Additional review or further revision may be requested when necessary.

Combined estimated timeframe for peer review, author revision, and reassessment: Approximately 4–12 weeks (about 1–3 months). This estimate covers these stages together, rather than separately. Manuscripts requiring substantial changes, multiple revision rounds, or additional expert assessment may take longer.

6. Final Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision to accept, request revision, or reject a manuscript, taking into account its academic merit, reviewer reports, journal policy, and advice from the Editorial Board when appropriate. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the final decision.

Estimated timeframe: Approximately 1 week after all required reviewer reports, revisions, and assessments are complete.

7. Copyediting, Typesetting, and Author Proofreading

Accepted manuscripts undergo language editing, copyediting, and typesetting. Authors review the proofs, verify the accuracy of the content, and respond to editorial queries before publication. Any substantive changes at this stage require editorial approval and may require further assessment.

Estimated timeframe: Approximately 2–4 weeks, depending on the extent of editing required and the timely return of author corrections.

8. Publication Schedule

The journal publishes two issues per year, in February and September. Accepted articles are scheduled for an issue according to completion of the production process and space availability. Articles that are not ready by an issue’s production deadline may be scheduled for a subsequent issue.

Overall Estimated Processing Time

The editorial and production process, from submission through completion of proofreading, is estimated to take approximately 9–21 weeks (about 2–5 months). This estimate excludes the waiting period for the scheduled publication issue.

These timeframes are approximate and may vary depending on manuscript completeness, subject specialization, reviewer availability, author responsiveness, and the number of revision rounds. Additional time may be needed to secure suitable reviewers for highly specialized manuscripts. The estimates do not guarantee acceptance or publication within a fixed period.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Manuscripts, reviewer reports, correspondence, and editorial deliberations are confidential. Editors and reviewers must disclose competing interests and must not use unpublished information for personal advantage. Reviewers should decline review when impartial evaluation is not possible.

Article History

Published articles display the dates of initial manuscript receipt, receipt of the revised manuscript, and acceptance on the first page of the article PDF.