Peer Review Policies

PEER-REVIEW POLICIES

The BioMed Target Journal adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer-review policy to ensure the fairness and integrity of the scholarly publishing process. This policy requires that both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process. Below are the key components of our double-blind peer-review policies:

  1. Submission Anonymity: Authors are required to submit manuscripts without any identifying information, such as names, affiliations, or any personal acknowledgments that may reveal their identity to reviewers.

  2. Reviewer Anonymity: Similarly, reviewers' identities are kept confidential from the authors throughout the review process. The managing editorial staff will facilitate all communications between authors and reviewers.

  3. Preparation of Manuscripts: Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in a way that does not give away their identity. This includes the omission of any self-citations that are not absolutely necessary or using third-person references to their previous work.

  4. Reviewer Selection: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, objectivity, and absence of conflict of interest. Potential reviewers are required to disclose any conflicts of interest that might affect their review of a manuscript.

  5. Review Process:

    • Each manuscript is initially assessed by the editorial team for its alignment with the journal's scope and basic submission standards.
    • Manuscripts that pass this initial assessment are then assigned to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the pertinent subject area.
    • Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field, and to provide constructive feedback and a recommendation for the manuscript’s disposition (e.g., accept, revise, or reject).

  6. Decision Making: The final decision on the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an appointed associate editor based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations. This decision is then communicated to the authors along with any reviewer comments.

  7. Appeals: Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed justification for reconsideration. Appeals are reviewed by an independent panel or a senior member of the editorial board.

  8. Confidentiality: All aspects of the review process are strictly confidential. Reviewers are specifically instructed not to share any part of the manuscript during or after the review process without explicit permission from the journal.

By adhering to these double-blind peer-review policies, BMTJ aims to maintain the highest standards of impartiality and transparency in its publication process, fostering a trustworthy and respectful environment for authors and reviewers alike.