Peer review policy

The peer review process is meant the safeguard the quality of articles published in PiscoMed's journals. Most submissions, including all original research articles and reviews, to PiscoMed’s journals are peer reviewed. The exceptions include editorials and letters to the editor, which may or may not be published without peer review, at the discretion of the editors.

All submissions selected for peer review will be reviewed by at least one, but usually more, reviewers. Depending on the journal, peer review may be single blind or double blind. See each individual journal’s webpage for more information. Reviewers are selected for their knowledge of the subject field, as well as other factors such as promptness. Authors may suggest up to 4 independent researchers as reviewers, or request the editors not to approach select researchers. However, the editors reserve the right to choose reviewers in the best interests of the journal, and their choice of reviewers is final. The editors use reviewer reports to come to a conclusion on whether or not to publish the paper. The conclusion will usually fall into one of three main options: accept, revise, or reject. Should a paper necessitate a revision, it will usually be returned to the same reviewers who reviewed it the first time (subject to availability).

Authors may appeal a reject decision. Appeal requests must be made in writing to the relevant journal’s email address with detailed reasons for the appeal and a point by point response to the reviewers’ remarks. Decisions on appeals are final without exception.