AAM has a clear peer review policy and has adopted a disting guidline to help reviewers doing the peer review.

Review Guidelines

The peer reviewing policy of AAM, thinking of the current standards of the manuscript writing in Ayurveda , is framed supportive to the authors in a manner that any possibilities of improving the manuscripts should not remain unexplored . The basic idea of peer reviewing in AAM is focused upon:

1.Need and objectivity of the research

2. Novelty associated with research

3. Basic formatting of the manuscript- IMRAD style ( except the literary researches or review article)

4.Basic formatting of the individual components of the manuscript

5. Issues of materials and methods- if the materials are appropriately chosen and if the methods are appropriate to reach the objectives of the study.

6. Data presentation: if it is appropriate or it require more specified data to reach at an inference

7. Analysis : if the methods adopted to make the analysis are appropriate

8.Discussion: if this part covers appropriately the limitations of the study Besides this , the quality of language, referencing and redundancy of the material are important criteria of consideration.

9. Ethical issues: if there are any ethical issues involved in the study. If the informed consent is appropriately taken. In case of single case reports if the publication consent is taken.

10. Conflict of interest: if there are any conflicts of interest involved in the study 

11. Declaration of funding sources: If the study is funded from some where, whether such support is clealy declared or not.

The idea of publishing AAM is not only limited with publication of good researches which may have a possibility of publication else where too, but also is extended to development of a credible authorship among young researchers of Ayurveda. We suppose that the later aspect of AAM objective is rather more crucial as there are very few who cater to this need on a real rationale basis.|

Reviewer's conflicts of Interest: In case if a reviewer assigned for a review to a submission find him self inappropriate for making an unbiased review because of any reason or related conflict of interest, they are requested to define it in the beginning of the process only so that the review process may not get affected by any of such conflicts. In case of their inappropriateness for reviewing a particular article because of associated conflict of interest, they may suggest some other potential reviewers who may be suitable for reviewing the article. 

Confidentiality: every reviewer assigned for reviewing a submission to AAM shares the responsibility of integrity and confidentiality of the material submitted to him as the part of the review process. In any case and for any reason the material submitted to him as a review process, should not be shared with any one or should not be used for any other reason.    

Single Blinded peer review : The journal adopts a double blinded peer review process where the authors and assigned reviewers are blinded to each other . This is practiceed in order to avoid any potential bias in the review process at any stagae.   

Credential of the peer reviewers : Peer review is done by external reviewers who are not the part of the editorial board and who have a credential in the particualr field and also in the field of research publication.

|