At the Journal of Nephrology, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly integrity, scientific quality, and editorial transparency. Our double-blind peer review process ensures that all submitted manuscripts undergo a thorough, unbiased, and constructive evaluation by experts in the field.

✦ Overview of the Peer Review Process

Each submitted manuscript follows these steps:

1. Initial Editorial Screening
   • The editorial team conducts a preliminary review to assess:
     • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
     • Basic formatting compliance
     • Ethical considerations (e.g., IRB approval, consent)
     • Plagiarism check using reliable software
   • Manuscripts that do not meet basic criteria are rejected at this stage.
2. Assignment to an Editor
   • Suitable manuscripts are assigned to an Associate Editor or Section Editor with relevant subject expertise.
3. Reviewer Selection
   • At least two independent reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript.
   • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication record, and impartiality.
   • The review process is double-blind: neither reviewers nor authors know each other’s identities.
4. Review Evaluation
   • Reviewers assess the manuscript for scientific quality, originality, clarity, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.
   • Each reviewer submits a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
5. Editorial Decision
   • The handling editor reviews all feedback and makes a final decision.
   • Authors receive a decision letter along with anonymized reviewer comments.
6. Revision and Resubmission
   • If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed point-by-point response to reviewer comments.
   • Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review if necessary.
7. Final Acceptance and Production
   • Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting, formatting, and publication.
   • All accepted articles are published online in open access format for immediate visibility.

✦ Review Timeline

We aim to maintain an efficient and timely review process:

• Initial editorial screening: 5–7 business days
• Peer review completion: 3–4 weeks
• Final decision: within 6 weeks from submission (on average)

✦ Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts and reviewer comments are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are instructed not to share, cite, or use any part of the manuscript during or after the review process.

⚖️ Ethical Integrity

The journal follows the ethical guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Any concerns regarding plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or conflict of interest are thoroughly investigated and acted upon.

✦ Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly reviewed may submit an appeal. The appeal must include a detailed rationale and will be reviewed by a senior editorial board member not involved in the original decision.

✦ Questions?

For inquiries related to the peer review process, please contact: editor.nephrology@sciconxjournals.com