Peer Review Process

This section provides a brief general overview of the peer review process at the AME journals. The specific peer review process and submission turnaround time may vary slightly depending on the journal due to the constitution of an editorial team.

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by an editor of the specific journal. Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria:

  • the material is original and timely;
  • the manuscript is written clearly in accordance to the author instruction;
  • appropriate study methods have been used;
  • the data are valid;
  • the conclusions are reasonable and well supported by the data;
  • the information contained in the manuscript is important, topical, and medically relevant.

 

From these basic criteria, the editors assess a paper’s eligibility for publication. Other manuscripts are sent to expert consultants for peer review.

Unless otherwise indicated*, all AME journals use single-blind peer review, which means the identity of the peer reviewer is kept confidential, but the author’s identity is made known to the reviewer.

*Please note that two AME journals, Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition and Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery, use double-blind peer review, which means that the identities of both the reviewer and the author are kept unknown to each other throughout the review process.

For every manuscript for review, we will ensure to have at least two reviewers and sometimes more opinions are sought. Peer reviewers are selected based on their expertise and ability to provide high quality, constructive, and fair reviews. For research manuscripts, editors may, in addition, seek the opinion of a statistical reviewer.

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. Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed to help improve the quality of the editorial or peer-review processes. Identifying information remains confidential. Final decisions regarding the publication of manuscripts are made within the Editorial Team.

Online review system

Aiming for the convenience and efficiency of the peer review process, our peer review is conducted and trackable electronically via both the OJS system (journal website) and the self-develop review system by AME named “AME Bond between Editors and Reviewers” (“ABER” for short). Here is a link to the ABER system: http://www.theaber.com/home.

AME Bond between Editors and Reviewers (ABER) was designed and launched by AME Publishing Company, with the goal of connecting editorial teams and reviewers. Editorial staff can upload their manuscripts that are ready to be reviewed, release the task description on the ABER system and monitor the review process. Researchers can register to become an ABER member with valid identity verification. Then they can search for the subject area they are interested in by using key words, and claim a manuscript they want to peer review. They are also able to share their thoughts or comments on the ABER system. Furthermore, for every manuscript they peer review they will be rewarded with “AME points” which allows them to purchase various items in the AME online store, including but not limited to medical books and journals.

Peer review flowchart

  1. Science Editors pass the submitted manuscript to the Editor(s)-in-Chief.
  2. Depending on the topic of the submitted manuscript, the Editor(s)-in-Chief passes the article to the Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief/Associate Editor(s) or an Editorial Board Member with related expertise.
  3. The assigned editorial members with related expertise review the manuscript or recommend external reviewers to the editorial office. The recommendation of external reviewers may be carried out via a literature search to identify appropriate external experts.
  4. External experts review the manuscript.
  5. External experts make recommendations.
  6. External experts’ recommendations are sent to the Editor(s)-in-Chief, along with a review from the assigned Associate Editor and Member of the Editorial Board.
  7. The Editor(s)-in-Chief makes a decision on the manuscript, for which there are four options: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.

 

Submission Turnaround Time

  • In-house review: 1-3 weeks
  • External peer review: 2-3 months
  • Revision time: 2-4 weeks
  • Publication Ahead of Print: within 1 month after being accepted
  • Formal publication: within 1-3 months after being accepted. Original Articles are listed as priority.

 

Updated on February 22, 2020