Peer-Review

By following a comprehensive and rigorous peer-review policy, Osler Press ensures that the submitted manuscripts are evaluated objectively and fairly, and that only high-quality research is published in the journal. 

Our editors work in collaboration with authors and external peer reviewers to ensure fair and evidence based assessment, which frequently necessitates revisions and entails meticulous checking. 

A guide to Osler Peer-review System

The journal operates on a single-blind transparent review process. Although the reviewer’s name is hidden from the author, the reviewers have accessibility to the authors’ names in order to prevent any possible personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with authors.

The assigned editor(s) is responsible for selecting qualified peer reviewers for each manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the field, and their ability to provide critical and unbiased feedback. The journals rarely consider the author’s suggestions for reviewers and editors usually invite independent reviewers based on their discretion. The article will be rejected for willful falsification of information, such as recommending reviewers with a false name or email address, and may result in further inquiry in accordance with our misconduct policy and the discretion of Editorial Office.

Our built-in system ensures that the identity of the reviewer remains anonymous and an integer (a whole number) is assigned to them, to serve as an identity after the review is complete (e.g. Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2, etc).

The reviewers are given a timeframe, usually within two weeks (extendable by a further two weeks) to submit their reports. If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the allotted time frame, they should notify the editor(s) as soon as possible. The editor(s) will make the final decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript based on the feedback provided by the reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief may intervene in the review process of any manuscript and also seek additional input from the editorial board or external experts if necessary. In case of any discrepancies, the decision of the Editor-in Chief is final and binding.

Osler Press aims to have the average time from submission to first decision of 1 week for those submissions rejected without peer-review and of 4 weeks for those submissions that are sent for peer-review.  

Criteria for Selection of Manuscripts for Reviewers

1. Originality: Manuscripts should present original research that adds new knowledge or insights to the field. 
2. Significance: Manuscripts should have a significant impact on the field, either by providing important new information, validating current literature, challenging existing theories or practices, or proposing innovative solutions to important problems.
3. Relevance: Manuscripts should be relevant to the journal’s scope and audience.
4. Methodological soundness: Manuscripts should be based on a rigorous and well-designed methodology that is appropriate for the research question or hypothesis. The methodology should be clearly described and justified, and the results should be interpreted appropriately.
5. Ethical considerations: Manuscripts should adhere to ethical principles and guidelines for research involving human or animal subjects, data acquisition, and data analysis as listed in our Ethics statement and Ethical guidelines.
6. Format and style: Manuscripts should follow the journal’s guidelines for formatting, referencing, and style. This includes appropriate use of tables, figures, and references, as well as adherence to the journal’s word count and other formatting requirements as listed in Author guidelines.

Invitation to Participate as a Reviewer

We are delighted to extend this invitation to you to join our respected team of Osler Press reviewers. Your expertise and knowledge in research areas relevant to our journal make you a valuable addition to our team. The quality and integrity of the papers we examine for publication will be maintained in large part by your observations and evaluations. 

To ensure a smooth and efficient review process, we kindly request your cooperation in following the guidelines outlined below:

1. Accepting the Invitation:

Please respond to the review invitation email promptly, indicating your availability and willingness to review the manuscript. You will find links in the invitation email that allow you to accept or decline the invitation.  This will help us avoid unnecessary delays and allow us to promptly invite alternative reviewers if necessary. 

2.  Review Timeline: 

We normally give reviewers two weeks to submit their evaluations for consideration. Please let the editor(s) know as soon as possible if you need a two-week extension or more. Timely completion of reviews is essential for maintaining the efficiency of the editorial process.

3. Confidentiality:

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscripts they review. Without the journal’s prior approval, the content, findings, and any supplemental materials should not be disclosed to anyone.

4. Conflict of Interest: 

Reviewers are required to disclose any actual or prospective conflicts of interest that might influence their judgment when evaluating a manuscript. This includes any financial, professional, or personal relationships with the authors, institutions, or organizations associated with the manuscript.

Reviewers who have a conflict of interest with a specific manuscript should decline the review request and notify the journal promptly.

5. Permission to Publish Reviews:

We may consider publishing the anonymised peer-reviewer reports in the future. By accepting to complete a review, you are granting us permission to publish your review under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 license. 

6. Ethical Considerations:

 Reviewers should report any concerns about the ethical conduct of the research, such as potential fabrication, falsification, or unethical experimentation, to the journal editor.

7. Originality and Plagiarism: 

Reviewers should notify the journal editor if they believe the reviewed manuscript contains any instances of uncredited use of previously published work or plagiarism.

If you have any questions or require further clarification, please do not hesitate to contact us at editorialoffice@oslerpress.org. Thank you once again for your dedication and cooperation.

To become an Osler Press reviewer

To become an Osler Press reviewer and have your valuable insights published, contact us at editorialoffice@oslerpress.org. We only invite leading subject-matter experts related to the manuscript topic for the peer-review process. The reviewers must have published/presented at least five manuscripts previously in peer-reviewed journals.