MJSTEM operates a rigorous double-blind external peer-review system to ensure the scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness and ethical integrity of published research.

• Each research article is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.
• Reviewers must be independent of the authors and must have no personal, professional, institutional, financial or other conflict of interest that could compromise the objectivity of their assessment.
• The identities of authors and reviewers are normally kept confidential throughout the review process.
• Following peer review, the editor may decide to accept the manuscript, request minor revisions, request major revisions and further review, or reject the manuscript.
• The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately delegated editor. Peer reviewers provide scholarly recommendations, but the final decision remains an editorial responsibility.
• Where reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the editor may seek clarification, obtain an additional independent review, or make a decision based on the available evidence and the manuscript's scholarly merit.
• Editors and editorial board members may submit manuscripts to MJSTEM, but they must not participate in the editorial decision concerning their own manuscripts. Such manuscripts are assigned to an independent editor without a conflict of interest.
• Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and must not use, reproduce, distribute or disclose unpublished information contained in manuscripts under review.
• The journal may investigate suspected peer-review manipulation, fraudulent reviewer identities, fabricated reviews or other forms of review misconduct in accordance with its publication-ethics procedures.
• MJSTEM's peer-review process is conducted in accordance with recognised principles of scholarly publishing ethics and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Read the full Peer Review Policy.

MJSTEM maintains full editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly merit of submitted work and are not influenced by commercial, political, institutional, or personal interests.

• The Editor-in-Chief has final authority over all editorial content and decisions.
• Decisions to accept or reject manuscripts are made independently of the publisher and any funding or sponsoring bodies.
• Advertising, reprints, or commercial partnerships do not influence editorial decisions.
• Editorial decisions are never influenced by the nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors.

A conflict of interest exists when professional judgement concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial or personal considerations). MJSTEM requires the full disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest.

MJSTEM follows internationally recognised criteria for authorship to ensure that credit and accountability are appropriately assigned.

Authorship should be based on substantial contribution to the work. All those designated as authors should meet the following criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
• Final approval of the version to be published.
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to its accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Individuals who contributed only administrative, financial, technical, or language-editing assistance should be acknowledged but not listed as authors.

MJSTEM recognises the growing role of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in research and writing and requires their responsible and transparent use.

• Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors, as they cannot take responsibility or be accountable for the content of a manuscript.
• AI tools may be used to assist with language and readability, but authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their work.
• Any use of generative AI in the preparation of a manuscript must be disclosed in the methods or acknowledgements section, describing the tool used and how it was applied.
• The use of AI to fabricate, alter, or manipulate data, results, or images is strictly prohibited.
• Undisclosed use of artificial intelligence in generating scientific findings is treated as research misconduct.
• Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or any part of them to generative AI tools, as this breaches confidentiality.