Peer review

Peer review is a fundamental process for ensuring the quality, originality, and reliability of a manuscript before publication. This mechanism not only protects the integrity of academic research but also enhances content through constructive dialogue between authors and subject matter experts.

For a publishing house, peer review is an essential filter that ensures only high-quality, credible research contributions are disseminated to the scientific community. The primary objective is to add value to authors’ work by encouraging them to strengthen their research through critical feedback from experts in the field.

The best practices for peer review are defined by internationally recognized institutions such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA). iEditore strictly adheres to these guidelines to guarantee transparency, fairness, and quality in the peer review process.

Core Principles of Peer Review

iEditore is committed to upholding the highest standards of peer review, following a rigorous process based on the following principles, in compliance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines:

• Transparency: The review process follows clear, traceable procedures with well-defined evaluation criteria.
• Objectivity: Each manuscript is assessed solely based on its scientific merit, free from external influences.
• Expertise: Reviewers are selected based on their proven experience in the specific research area under evaluation.
• Confidentiality: Reviewer identities remain anonymous (single-blind or double-blind peer review) to ensure impartial evaluations without external pressures.
• Constructive Feedback: The review process is aimed at improving the manuscript, providing authors with detailed and insightful recommendations.

The Peer Review Process at iEditore

1. Manuscript Submission

The corresponding author submits the manuscript through our online system, attaching all necessary files (supplementary data, media, cover letter, ethical declarations, and conflict of interest disclosures).

2. Preliminary Evaluation

Our editorial team verifies that the manuscript adheres to the journal’s formatting guidelines, ethical policies, and transparency requirements regarding conflicts of interest and data availability.

3. Editor-in-Chief Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief reviews the study’s quality, relevance, and originality. If the manuscript does not align with the journal’s scope or presents methodological weaknesses, it may be rejected at this stage without proceeding to peer review.

4. Selection of Reviewers

Editors identify qualified experts in the field to evaluate the manuscript. Each reviewer must accept the assignment based on their expertise, availability, and absence of conflicts of interest, as outlined by COPE guidelines.

5. Peer Review Process

Reviewers assess the manuscript through multiple stages:

• An initial screening to evaluate the overall quality of the work.
• A detailed analysis, including specific feedback and suggestions for improvement.
• A final recommendation, which may include:
  • Acceptance with no modifications.
  • Minor revisions to refine the manuscript.
  • Major revisions requiring additional data, improved arguments, or methodological corrections.
  • Rejection, if the study does not meet the minimum quality standards.

6. Editorial Decision and Author Notification

The editor collects the reviewers’ feedback and makes a final decision. If revisions are required, the authors receive a detailed report with clear guidance for improving their manuscript.

7. Revision and Subsequent Versions

Authors incorporate the suggested modifications or provide a justified response to the reviewers’ comments. If substantial changes are required, the revised manuscript may undergo a second round of peer review.

8. Final Approval and Production

Once the manuscript meets all editorial and scientific requirements, it moves to the final formatting and production stage before publication.

iEditore’s Commitment to Transparent Peer Review

At iEditore, we continuously strive to ensure maximum transparency and reliability in the peer review process. We adhere to the recommendations of leading international organizations, including COPE, ICMJE, and OASPA, to maintain the highest ethical and scientific publishing standards. Additionally, when possible, we implement open peer review policies to increase visibility in the review process and build greater trust in the research we publish. We are also actively exploring new methodologies to enhance the efficiency of peer review, ensuring that scientific knowledge is disseminated responsibly and accessibly to all.