Peer Review Process

Once an article is submitted for review at Milestone Transactions on Medical Technometrics, it will be evaluated by journal staff to ensure it meets our technical requirements for submission.
The manuscript will be sent to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal to begin the review process when the manuscript passed our technical check. It will be evaluated whether the submitted manuscript is suitablefor Milestone Transactions on Medical Technometricsbased on the aims and scope, methodological flaw and readability of the articles.
Furthermore, the manuscript will be sent to atleast 2 anonymous reviewers (Double-Blind Peer-Review), which means the reviewers do not know the names of the authors, and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript (but if the research is published reviewers can eventually know the names of the authors).
The anonymous reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses. Afterward, the editorial team suggested the final decision to the revised manuscript by authors.
Finally, the Editor-in-Chief will send the final decision to the corresponding author.
The accepted manuscript then continued to the copyediting and layout editing process to prepare the camera-ready paper.

Plagiarism Detection

Reuse of words must be kept to a minimum, credited, or quoted in the text, and all sources must be cited when they are used. Milestone Transactions on Medical Technometrics uses the Similarity Check service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate to provide editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism, a text similarity below 20% is acceptable by the journal. The CrossRef Similarity Check uses iThenticate originality detection software to identify text similarities which may indicate plagiarism. It does this by comparing manuscripts with both a web repository and the CrossRef/DataCite database.