Peer Review Process

Publication of articles in MUST is dependent solely on the scientific validity as judged by our editors and/or reviewers, who will also assess whether the writing is comprehensible and whether the work represents a useful contribution to the field.

Initial evaluation of manuscripts

At this stage, the Editor performs a plagiarism test using Turnitin with a maximum plagiarism limit of 20%. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the aims and scope of the MUST. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to reviewers.

First decision

The editor will first evaluate the submitted manuscripts. The submission to the first decision takes 8 days (Median).

Submission to post-review decision

The time required for the review process is 4 (four) weeks. This means that the authors will receive the review result after 4 weeks from submission.

Type of peer review

The manuscripts will be reviewed by at least 2 (two) peer reviewers. The method is a double-blind peer review. The editor ensures that in every process of reviewing, the author does not know the reviewers and vice versa. 

Review reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original by stating the objectives clearly
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Has results/findings which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work


The editors will reach a decision based on the reviewer's reports, and where necessary, they will consult with members of the editorial board. Editor's decision is final.