Peer Review Process
What is peer review process?
Peer reviewÂ is the evaluation of work done by one or more people with similar competences as the producers of the work (peers). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevantÂ field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. InÂ academia,Â scholarly peer reviewÂ is often used to determine anÂ academic paper'sÂ suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g.,Â medical peer review. From a publisherâ€™s perspective, peer review functions as a filter for content, directing better quality articles to better quality journals and so creating journal brands.
Why is peer review important?
Peer reviewersâ€™ comments and recommendations is an essential guide to inform the editorâ€™s decision on a manuscript. Peer review ensures that manuscripts receive unbiased critique and expert feedback, allowing authors to improve their manuscript and therefore high quality scientific research and reviews to be published. It also helps the readers to trust the scientific integrity of the article and to make informed decisions where peer reviewer comments are available.
The review process
All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial members. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review (although these decisions may be based on informal advice from specialists in the field).
Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to two or three reviewers, but sometimes more if special advice is needed (for example on statistics or a particular technique). The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice, from among several possibilities:
Nature Research journals are committed to rapid editorial decisions and publication, and we believe that an efficient editorial process is a valuable service both to our authors and to the scientific community as a whole. We therefore ask reviewers to respond promptly within the number of days agreed. If reviewers anticipate a longer delay than previously expected, we ask them to let us know so that we can keep the authors informed and, where necessary, find alternatives.
Type of peer review
Peer review process in IP Innovative Publication Private Limited
Writing the Report
Peer reviewers should assess the major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as well as look at the statistical power of the study if relevant.
In the first part of their report, peer reviewers should write a short summary describing their assessment of the manuscript. They should then provide general comments to be addressed, followed by any specific comments they may have. Comments should be numbered so that authors can easily refer to them in their point-by-point response to referee comments. All requested major revisions should be clearly outlined. Minor revisions should also be mentioned where peer reviewers feel these will improve the manuscriptâ€™s clarity and purpose.
If any form of misconduct is suspected such as plagiarism, undeclared conflicts of interest, falsification of results etc., these should be intimated directly in confidence to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.
Peer reviewers must ensure that they answer the following questions in their report:
Peer reviewers should provide the Editor-in-Chief with a recommendation regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication. They can recommend that the manuscript should be accepted for publication with revisions (â€śrevise and resubmitâ€ť), accepted without revisions, or rejected.
Total No of Journals