Peer Review Process

The process

1. Technical check (about 7 days)

   The editorial office checks scope, completeness, anonymisation and similarity. Manuscripts that are out of scope or above the similarity threshold are returned without review.

2. Handling editor

   An editor with relevant expertise and no conflict of interest takes charge of the manuscript.

3. Review (usually 3–5 weeks)

   At least two independent reviewers assess originality, methods, results, interpretation, ethics and presentation.

4. Decision

   Accept, minor revision, major revision or reject. Authors receive all reviewer reports.

5. Revision

   Authors respond point by point. Major revisions are normally sent back to the reviewers.

Editorial independence

• Decisions are based only on the scholarly content. Payment and the ability to pay play no part.
• Editors and board members who submit to the journal are treated like any other author: their manuscripts are handled by a different editor and they are excluded from the process.
• Reviewers must declare conflicts of interest and decline if they recognise the authors.

Appeals

Authors may appeal a decision by writing to the editorial office with a reasoned explanation. Appeals are considered by an editor not previously involved with the manuscript; the Editor-in-Chief's decision on appeal is final.