Review Process
The review process at History of Medicine is designed to ensure the quality, integrity, and timeliness of published research. This process adheres to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines to maintain high ethical standards and transparency. Here’s a detailed overview of the review process:
1-Submission and Initial Checks
Submission: Authors submit their manuscript through the journal’s online system, which checks for all required files and information.
Initial Checks by Editorial Office: The editorial office screens the manuscript to ensure it fits the journal’s scope and follows submission guidelines. It checks for completeness, formatting, and adherence to ethical standards, including plagiarism detection.
Editor Assignment: An appropriate Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor is assigned based on the manuscript’s topic and expertise.
2-Peer Review Process
Reviewer Selection: The editor selects at least two relevant experts to review the manuscript and provides them with the abstract and relevant information.
Reviewers Accept Invitation: Reviewers accept or decline the invitation within one week. If a reviewer declines, the editor invites another expert to avoid delays.
Double-Blind Peer Review: Reviewers conduct a double-blind review, hiding both authors’ and reviewers’ identities. They assess the manuscript for originality, significance, methodological rigor, ethical standards, clarity, and relevance. Reviewers then recommend one of the following decisions: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject.
Reviewers Submit Reports: Reviewers submit their reports within four weeks, including detailed comments for the authors and confidential comments for the editor.
3-Editorial Decision and Revisions
Editor’s Decision: The editor reviews the reports and makes an initial decision to accept, request revisions, or reject the manuscript. If revisions are needed, the editor provides consolidated feedback to the authors.
Author Revisions: Authors receive the decision and feedback, revise their manuscript accordingly, and resubmit it.
Revised Manuscript Review: The revised manuscript is reviewed by the original or new reviewers to ensure all concerns have been addressed.
4-Final Decision and Publication
Final Decision: Based on feedback on the revised manuscript, the editor makes a final decision to accept or reject it.
Acceptance and Proofreading: Accepted manuscripts undergo final proofreading and typesetting. Authors review the proofs for any final corrections.
Publication: The final manuscript is published online under a CC BY 4.0 license, ensuring open access.
5-COPE Recommendations History of Medicine follows COPE guidelines to ensure a fair and transparent review process:
Integrity and Confidentiality: Maintain manuscript confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest.
Transparency: Provide clear feedback and base decisions on research quality and integrity.
Fairness: Use a double-blind review process and treat all submissions impartially.
Ethical Standards: Adhere to ethical guidelines, including avoiding plagiarism and data fabrication, and address misconduct promptly and transparently.
By following these guidelines and COPE recommendations, History of Medicine ensures a rigorous, fair, and transparent review process that upholds high academic standards.
