Peer Review Policy for Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Peer Review Policy on the Journal of Biomedical Informatics
The practice of peer review is to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the Journal of Biomedical Informatics, and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Special issues and other invited material may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects will receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are assigned to an associate editor and are in turn passed on to at least 2 experts for review.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will generally be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.
Type of Peer Review
This journal employs single blind review, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process. Occasionally a referee will ask that their identity be revealed to the author(s) of a manuscript, but this is neither required nor expected.
How the referee is selected
Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We request suggestions for referees from the author during the manuscript submission process, although these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referee reports
Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript : • Is original • Is methodologically sound • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines • Has results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions • Conforms to editorial policies on what is suitable for publication in this journal • Correctly references previous relevant work
Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, although problems with language or exposition can of course complicate a referee's effort to understand and judge a submitted manuscript.
How long does the review process take?
Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 4 weeks. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. All our referees sign a conflict of interest statement. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees within one week. In response to referees' comments, the Editor may request more than one revision of a manuscript.
Final report
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.
Editor's Decision is final
Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Home | Elsevier Sites | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Site Map | A Reed Elsevier Company