Peer Review Process
ISSN: 2641-5013 | Publisher: Heighten Sciences Publication Incorporation | Framework: COPE • ICMJE • WAME • DOAJ
1. Overview
The International Journal of Clinical Virology (IJCV) employs a rigorous, double-blind peer-review process to ensure scholarly excellence, transparency, and ethical compliance. All manuscripts undergo unbiased evaluation by at least two independent experts prior to editorial decision.
2. Peer Review Model
IJCV uses a double-blind peer-review system where both author and reviewer identities remain confidential throughout the process. This model promotes fairness and objectivity, ensuring evaluation based solely on the quality of research.
3. Workflow Summary
- Submission: Authors submit manuscripts via the OJS portal.
- Initial Screening: The editorial office verifies completeness, formatting, and ethical compliance.
- Plagiarism Check: Submissions are screened using iThenticate or Turnitin (similarity threshold < 20 %).
- Editorial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor determines suitability for review.
- Reviewer Assignment: Two or more qualified reviewers are invited.
- Review Evaluation: Reviewers assess scientific rigor, methodology, originality, and clarity.
- Decision & Revision: Editors synthesize reviewer feedback to make an informed decision.
- Final Approval: Upon acceptance, the article proceeds to copy-editing and production.
4. Reviewer Selection Criteria
- Expertise relevant to the manuscript’s field.
- Absence of conflicts of interest with authors or sponsors.
- History of high-quality, timely reviews.
- Diversity across institutions, geography, and gender.
5. Review Timeline
Typical turnaround time:
| Stage | Duration |
|---|---|
| Initial Editorial Screening | 3–5 days |
| Reviewer Invitation & Acceptance | 5–7 days |
| Reviewer Evaluation | 14–21 days |
| Editorial Decision | 7 days after final review |
| Revision (if applicable) | Up to 14 days (minor) / 28 days (major) |
6. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess each manuscript on the following parameters:
- Relevance to the aims and scope of IJCV.
- Scientific rigor, data accuracy, and reproducibility.
- Originality and novelty of the work.
- Ethical conduct and compliance with institutional approvals.
- Quality of figures, tables, and references.
- Clarity and coherence of the presentation.
7. Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct
All manuscripts, reviewer identities, and communications are confidential. Editors and reviewers must not disclose or use unpublished material. The process follows COPE confidentiality and fairness guidelines.
8. Plagiarism, Misconduct, and Data Integrity
IJCV employs plagiarism-detection tools to ensure originality. Editors may request raw data or ethical clearances. In cases of misconduct, COPE flowcharts guide corrective actions, including rejection or retraction.
9. Editorial Decision Categories
| Decision | Description |
|---|---|
| Accept | Manuscript meets all scientific and editorial standards. |
| Minor Revision | Requires small textual or formatting corrections before publication. |
| Major Revision | Significant improvements needed; authors must resubmit for reevaluation. |
| Reject | Fails to meet journal standards or scope; may be resubmitted after major rework. |
10. Revision Handling
- Authors receive detailed reviewer comments through OJS.
- Revised manuscripts must include a response letter addressing each point.
- Major revisions are re-sent to original reviewers for reevaluation.
- Editors make final decisions based on reviewer feedback and author response quality.
11. Appeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal decisions by submitting evidence of factual or procedural errors. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, if necessary, an independent ethics committee. All appeals are treated confidentially and without prejudice.
12. Transparency and Accountability
IJCV ensures transparency in reviewer selection and editorial decision-making. Editorial board members oversee periodic audits of review quality, timeliness, and fairness to maintain accountability and trust.
13. Recognition of Reviewers
To acknowledge contributions, reviewers receive digital certificates and may be listed annually (with consent) on the journal’s acknowledgment page. Outstanding reviewers are considered for editorial board nominations.
14. Ethical Use of AI and Automated Tools
AI tools used for language checks or reviewer recommendations must comply with data-privacy regulations. Manuscript content must never be uploaded to public AI systems. All automated tools are overseen by human editorial judgment.
15. Post-Publication Review and Corrections
IJCV encourages scholarly discussion and post-publication peer review. When legitimate concerns arise, editors coordinate corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern following COPE protocols.
16. Reviewer Ethics Summary
Reviewers must act with integrity, respect confidentiality, and provide fair, evidence-based evaluations. The goal is to improve the manuscript and advance scientific understanding rather than critique individuals.
17. Confidential Handling of Sensitive Data
Data containing identifiable patient information or proprietary research must be handled with strict confidentiality and compliance with international ethical standards. Reviewers and editors may not reproduce or retain such data post-review.
18. Integration with OJS-PKP Workflow
The entire peer-review process is managed through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Reviewers receive automated invitations, reminders, and decision updates via OJS. All review activities are timestamped and archived for transparency.
19. Policy Review and Updates
The Peer Review Policy is reviewed annually by the editorial board to incorporate evolving ethical standards and technological improvements in the publication process.
20. References and Global Standards
21. Contact
For Peer Review Enquiries
Email: [email protected]
Website: https://www.clinvirologyjournal.com/