All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by a journal editor. Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria: the material is original and timely; the manuscript is written clearly; appropriate study methods have been used; the data are valid; the conclusions are reasonable and well supported by the data; and the information contained in the manuscript is important, topical, and medically relevant. From these basic criteria, the editors assess a paper’s eligibility for peer review. CJOMS uses single-blind peer review. Each of the articles is peer-reviewed by two or three external peer reviewers.
We will send reviewers an email and ask to accept or decline the invitation through our submission system when need to appraise a manuscript. We ask for reviewers’ assistance to ensure that any studies published in CJOMS have been conducted properly, are scientifically credible and ethical, and are reported in accordance with the appropriate guidelines.
Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed to improve the quality of the editorial or peer review processes. All unpublished manuscripts are confidential documents. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than the peer reviewers and editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review and must not divulge any information about a specific manuscript or its content to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors. If we invite you to review an article and you choose to discuss the manuscript with a colleague, please remind them of the confidential nature of the paper and acknowledge their input in your review. If you have any serious concerns about a manuscript in relation to publication ethics (e.g., if you believe you have encountered a case of plagiarism), you can contact the Editorial Office in confidence.
Peer review experts need to review papers objectively and impartially. The standard for judging papers is academic quality, and personal criticism of authors is not allowed.
The editorial office is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript, based on the reviewers' comments.
We welcome feedback from our reviewers. If you have any comments you wish to make relating to a manuscript you have reviewed and our decision on it, or to our review process in general, we would be pleased to hear from you. Please also encourage colleagues to register as reviewers.
