Peer Review Policy

Introduction

The International Journal of Clinical Virology (IJCV) maintains a rigorous double-blind peer review system to uphold the integrity, accuracy, and quality of scholarly research. This policy outlines the procedures, timelines, and ethical standards that guide the peer review process in alignment with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ICMJE, DOAJ, and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review serves as a cornerstone of academic publishing. Its objectives are to:

• Assess the validity, originality, and significance of submitted research.
• Ensure clarity, completeness, and scientific accuracy of manuscripts.
• Enhance the quality of published work through constructive feedback.
• Safeguard the credibility and ethical standards of scholarly communication.

Type of Peer Review

IJCV employs a double-blind review process, meaning both author identities and reviewer identities are concealed throughout the review cycle. This approach minimizes potential bias and ensures impartial evaluation based solely on scholarly merit.

“Anonymous peer review ensures fairness, independence, and objectivity in scientific assessment.”

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are chosen based on their subject expertise, research background, publication record, and experience in the relevant domain. The Editorial Board ensures that reviewers:

• Hold advanced qualifications (PhD or equivalent) in related disciplines.
• Have no conflict of interest with the authors or funding agencies.
• Commit to confidentiality and ethical peer review conduct.

Each manuscript is typically evaluated by two independent reviewers, and a third reviewer may be invited in case of conflicting opinions.

Peer Review Workflow

Review Criteria

Each reviewer is requested to assess manuscripts according to the following criteria:

• Scientific validity and methodological soundness.
• Originality, innovation, and contribution to the field.
• Clarity of hypothesis, objectives, and conclusions.
• Appropriate data analysis and interpretation.
• Relevance and accuracy of references cited.
• Compliance with ethical research standards.

Reviewer Ethics and Conduct

• Maintain confidentiality and avoid sharing manuscript content with others.
• Provide objective, evidence-based feedback without personal criticism.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest prior to review.
• Notify editors if unable to complete the review within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers must not exploit unpublished data for personal advantage or research gain.

Editorial Decision Categories

• Accept without revision: The manuscript meets all scientific and ethical standards.
• Minor revision: Minor improvements or clarifications required before acceptance.
• Major revision: Substantial improvements required; manuscript resubmission mandatory.
• Reject: Manuscript unsuitable for publication due to low originality or poor scientific quality.

Timeline and Review Duration

IJCV is committed to timely editorial decisions. The average review duration is:

• Initial decision: Within 20–25 days of submission.
• Revised submission decision: Within 10–15 days.
• Final publication: Within 5–7 days post acceptance and formatting.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

All communication and data shared during peer review are treated as confidential. Reviewer identities are never disclosed to authors, and vice versa. Editors ensure strict control over access to manuscript files.

Appeal and Complaint Mechanism

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions may appeal by submitting a detailed rebuttal letter addressing reviewer comments. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial board member not involved in the initial decision.

Conflict of Interest Policy in Peer Review

Editors and reviewers must disclose any competing interests that could bias the review. If a conflict arises (e.g., collaboration, institutional affiliation, or financial connection), another reviewer is assigned to maintain impartiality.

Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct Detection

Manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening using iThenticate or Turnitin prior to peer review. Reviewers are encouraged to report any suspected ethical issues, data manipulation, or duplicate publication identified during their evaluation.

Reviewer Acknowledgment

IJCV values the contribution of peer reviewers. Outstanding reviewers are recognized annually through acknowledgments published on the journal’s website and editorial reports.

Transparency and Accountability

The journal adheres to COPE’s “Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers” and ensures transparency in decision-making. All correspondence, reviewer reports, and editorial decisions are securely archived in the OJS system for future audit and ethical verification.

Post-Publication Review

IJCV encourages constructive post-publication discussions. Readers may comment on or report potential errors through official communication channels. Substantiated concerns may lead to corrections, retractions, or updates following COPE guidelines.

Reviewer Confidentiality Agreement

By accepting a review invitation, reviewers agree to:

• Keep all manuscript data confidential.
• Use information solely for evaluation purposes.
• Destroy manuscript files after review completion.

Ethical Framework References

• COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
• ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct of Peer Review
• WAME Editorial Policy Guidelines
• DOAJ Best Practice Guidelines

Contact and Support

Editorial Office – International Journal of Clinical Virology (IJCV)
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://www.clinvirologyjournal.com/

View Reviewer Guidelines