Each submission to JRSR undergoes a rigorous quality control and peer-review evaluation before a final decision is made. The journal employs a double-anonymized peer-review system, in which each article is reviewed by at least two external experts.

Initially, submissions that meet the minimum requirements—such as a relevant title and abstract, appropriate disclosures regarding funding, privacy, and ethics, a statement of original work, and a completed and signed JRSR Record Form—are screened by the executive manager. Articles that pass this initial quality control and show promise are then forwarded for peer review.

The peer-review process is designed to uphold scientific credibility and research integrity. Importantly, submissions from JRSR staff and editors are also subject to peer review, and the editor does not participate in the review or decision-making process for these articles.

To facilitate a more targeted review, authors are encouraged to suggest at least three qualified researchers or physicians in their cover letter. However, JRSR is not obligated to use these recommendations.

Each paper is evaluated by at least two experts. If both reviews are positive, the editorial board may accept the article immediately or request revisions based on reviewer feedback. If one review is positive and the other negative, a third reviewer is assigned, and the final decision is based on their evaluation. If both initial reviews are negative, the article is rejected, and the corresponding author is notified. This indicates that the submission does not meet the minimum standards for publication in JRSR. However, future submissions from the same authors are welcome.