Peer-Review Process
Every manuscript submitted to the Journal of Surgical Radiology undergoes a formal peer-review process. The manuscript is assigned to an editor who has the experience and qualifications to appropriately manage the article and initiate the peer-review process.
After initial review by the editor, the manuscript is given one of two scores:
- Suitable for publication
- Unsuitable for publication
A score of “Suitable for publication” initiates the peer-review process required for all original submissions to the Journal of Surgical Radiology. Between two to five editors and external reviewers will evaluate the manuscript and provide their feedback to the primary editor. Based on this feedback, the primary editor then scores the manuscript as follows:
- Recommended for immediate publication
- Recommended for publication after minor revisions
- Requires reevaluation after substantial changes
- Unsuitable for publication
If the manuscript is “Recommended for immediate publication,” a release is sent to the author and the manuscript enters the publication queue. If an editor requests “Recommended for publication after minor revisions,” the author is asked to make a series of minor modifications that will make the manuscript suitable for publication. After those changes are made to the satisfaction of the editor, the manuscript is forwarded to the publication queue.
A score of “Requires reevaluation after substantial changes” sends the manuscript back to the author, who is asked to make a series of major changes in order for the article to be acceptable for publication. The revised manuscript is returned to the editor, who sends it the original editors and reviewers for reevaluation. The process proceeds similar to above until the manuscript is “Recommended for immediate publication,” deemed “Unsuitable for publication,” or is withdrawn from consideration. If at any time during the peer-review process the manuscript is deemed “Unsuitable for publication” by the primary editor or a majority of the reviewers, it is returned to the author.
The peer-review process for the Journal of Surgical Radiology ensures unbiased and fair review of all manuscripts submitted for evaluation. A double-blinded evaluation is used in which all identifying information, including author name and affiliation, are removed prior to being sent to the reviewers. The author is also blinded as to the names and affiliations of the reviewers to ensure integrity of the peer-review process. A list of all reviewers who have worked with the Journal of Surgical Radiology is updated on a regular basis on the website.
Principles and Guidelines
The Journal of Surgical Radiology espouses the principles advocated by the Council of Science Editors. Specifically, editors at the Journal of Surgical Radiology are responsible for ensuring a fair, objective, and honest review of all manuscripts and in their treatment of authors. Our editors will ensure timeliness, thoroughness, and civility throughout the peer-review process while providing a framework for authors to respond to scientifically valid criticism and feedback. The goal of this peer-review and editorial process is to ensure that only the highest quality content is published in the Journal of Surgical Radiology. What is printed should be trusted, particularly because it may influence clinical decision-making and the care of our patients.
The editors at the Journal of Surgical Radiology are given full editorial autonomy and freedom without any duress or impingement by the publisher, sponsors, or overall corporate entity. Editors are appointed for one year terms and cannot be removed from their position except under extraordinary circumstances. These policies are in place to ensure that the content is free of any conflicts of interest that may jeopardize the scientific validity of the content.
In order to ensure the accuracy and validity of all submitted contents, all authors are asked to make available their original data and analysis should it be requested by an editor. This data will be kept confidential and used only for manuscript review purposes. “Should possible scientific misconduct or dishonesty in research submitted for review be suspected or alleged, [the Journal of Surgical Radiology] reserves the right to forward any submitted manuscript to the sponsoring or funding institution or other appropriate authority for investigation. [The Journal of Surgical Radiology] recognizes the responsibility to ensure that the question is appropriately pursued, but does not undertake the actual investigation or make determinations of misconduct. (Uniform Requirements Ann Int Med 1997 126(1):45).” Authors will be asked to complete a conflict of interest disclosure form, which will also include any relevant financial, non-financial, academic, and personal conflicts of interest.
Costs and Charges
There are no page charges or subscription costs associated with the Journal of Surgical Radiology. It is provided free of charge and is accessible online via this website (www.SurgRad.com). A limited number of printed copies are available for a nominal printing and shipping charge. Income for the journal is generated through advertising revenue and net profits are shared with the editors as a small payment for their time and efforts. A financial conflict of interest does not exist as the advertising recruitment is handled by the publisher. The editors have no role in this process.
Please contact us with any questions you have about the publication process.
| < Prev |
|---|
