Peer Review Policy

The peer review policy of International Journal of Surgery and Clinical Research (IJSCR) is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in IJSCR.

Peer Review Guidelines

This journal follows a double-blind peer review process. In line with the aims and mission of the journal, manuscripts are normally peer reviewed by two independent academic experts, and additional or supplementary reviews by experts from the policy community may be sought to ensure high-quality, impactful publications that are both academically rigorous and policy relevant.

Reviewers are expected to observe the Ethics Policy of publication, including the documents referenced in it, and are encouraged to read and observe the COPE ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Those who oversee the peer review process are expected to recognize warning signs of misconduct and to report any concerns to the editorial office.

The criteria against which manuscripts are assessed include

1. Fit with the aims and scope of the journal;

2. Adherence to generally accepted academic standards in terms of originality, significance and rigour, as well as to the criteria of high-quality research and analysis set out in publication policies.

Review process

The peer review process can be broadly summarized into following steps, although these steps can vary slightly between journals.

Submission of Research Article/ Review Article/ Case Report

The corresponding or submitting author submits the Manuscript to the IJSCR. This is usually via an online submission and editor mail id:  editor@ijscr.info such as Scholar-One Manuscripts. Occasionally, IJSCR may accept submissions by E-mail: editor@ijscr.info

1. Manuscripts are initially screened by the Editor for completeness and adherence to the formal aspects of the Author Guidelines. Manuscripts may be returned to authors to remedy issues before progression to the Editors’ desk.

2. The Editor-in-Chief  assess submissions and decide whether they are suitable for progression to the next stage of the review process on the basis of fit to the scope of journal, publishing standards of the journal and interest for the policy community.

3. Based on the reviewer reports will recommend to the Editors a decision on the manuscript.

Review is Conducted: The reviewer sets time aside to read the manuscript several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the manuscript without further work. Otherwise they will read the manuscripts several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review policy. The review is then submitted to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) of IJSCR, with a recommendation to accept or reject it or else with a request for revision either major or minor before it is reconsidered of manuscript.

Role of Editor-in-Chief (EIC)

The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) checks that the manuscript is appropriate for the IJSCR and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the manuscript may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

Special cases

Guest Editors of Special Issues or Focused Sections are excluded from the review process and publication decisions when they are authors of or contributors to a manuscript. In such cases, the review process and publication decision will be overseen by one of the Editors of the journal.

Communications with authors

At each stage of the review process, authors will be provided reasoned and constructive feedback about the decisions on their manuscript.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. The confidentiality of participants in the review process is protected.