Peer Review Process

The Annals of Dermatological Research (ADR) adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure scientific quality, fairness, and transparency. This process is designed to evaluate manuscripts objectively, enhance the clarity of research, and maintain the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing.

ADR’s peer review process is based on confidentiality, impartiality, and accountability, aligned with COPE, ICMJE, and WAME best practices.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial office to confirm compliance with ADR’s submission guidelines, formatting requirements, and scope. Manuscripts may be returned to authors for technical corrections before peer review.

Reviewer Selection

  • Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, publication history, and absence of conflicts of interest.
  • Diversity in reviewer selection is encouraged to reflect global perspectives in dermatological research.
  • At least two independent reviewers are typically assigned to each manuscript.

Double-Blind Review

In ADR’s double-blind system, both reviewer and author identities are anonymized to promote fairness and minimize bias. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodology, significance, and ethical compliance.

Reviewer Reports

Reviewers provide structured feedback, highlighting strengths, identifying weaknesses, and suggesting improvements. Reports are submitted to the editor, who synthesizes reviewer feedback into a decision letter.

Editorial Decision-Making

Based on reviewer feedback and editorial assessment, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: Manuscript is suitable for publication with minimal or no revisions.
  • Minor Revision: Manuscript requires minor changes before acceptance.
  • Major Revision: Substantial revisions are required; manuscript may undergo re-review.
  • Reject: Manuscript does not meet ADR’s standards or falls outside its scope.

Revision Process

Authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript with a detailed response letter addressing reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to original reviewers for further assessment.

Timeframe

ADR strives to complete the first round of peer review within 4–6 weeks. The total time to publication may vary depending on revision cycles and editorial requirements.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a reasoned response with supporting evidence. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial member not involved in the original decision.

Ethical Oversight

Reviewers and editors must report suspected ethical violations, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or failure to obtain ethical approval. Such cases are handled following COPE flowcharts.

Transparency

ADR is committed to transparency. Peer review policies, including reviewer selection and decision-making criteria, are publicly available to maintain accountability in scholarly publishing.

FAQs

Is peer review anonymous?

Yes, ADR uses a double-blind review system where both author and reviewer identities are concealed.

How many reviewers evaluate each manuscript?

Typically, two reviewers are assigned, though more may be involved for specialized submissions.

What if reviewers disagree?

The editor may consult additional reviewers or make a decision based on balanced judgment.