Skip to main content

Navigation group

Peer Review Policy

Generally, two reviewers will evaluate each manuscript on the basis of scientific rigor of the experimental design, adequacy of the data, validity of the conclusions, importance and originality of the studies, adequacy of the literature citations, clarity of the presentation, and interest to the Journal's readership. Manuscripts will be given a quality (priority) ranking by each reviewer. Those manuscripts with low priority rankings will not be accepted even though they may have been classed as generally acceptable. If reviewers differ significantly in their opinions, the decision will be based on the priority rankings and/or the opinion of an additional reviewer (arbiter). Normally, revised manuscripts are sent back to the original reviewers together with the authors' responses.

The reviewers' comments will be held in confidence except as follows: (a) the reviewers' comments may be sent, in whole or in part, to the corresponding author; (b) after revision, each reviewer's comments will be sent, in whole or in part, to the other reviewers of the manuscript: and (c) in the event that there is a significant difference in opinion between or among the reviewers, the manuscript may be sent to an additional reviewer (arbiter) together with the comments, in whole or in part, of the other reviewers. In all cases, anonymity of the reviewers will be maintained.