Peer Review Policy

"The Cancer Research Review" is committed to publishing high-quality, original research that advances our understanding of cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. Peer review is an essential part of this process, ensuring the scientific rigor and significance of published articles. This policy outlines the principles and procedures for peer review used by the journal.

2. Review Process

  • Single-blind review: Reviewers are aware of the authors' names and affiliations, but author identities are removed from the manuscript before review. This helps to ensure fairness and prevent reviewer bias.
  • Number of reviewers: Each manuscript is typically reviewed by two or three independent experts with relevant expertise in the specific area of research.
  • Reviewer selection: Reviewers are chosen based on their qualifications, expertise, and potential conflicts of interest. The editorial team strives to select reviewers from diverse backgrounds and institutions.
  • Reviewer confidentiality: The identities of reviewers are kept confidential from the authors.
  • Decision process: The editor-in-chief makes the final decision on publication based on the reviewers' recommendations and their own assessment of the manuscript. Editors may consult with members of the editorial board in some cases.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Expertise: Reviewers are expected to have expertise in the relevant field of research and be qualified to assess the scientific merit of the manuscript.
  • Objectivity: Reviews should be objective, unbiased, and constructive. Personal opinions and biases should not be allowed to influence the review.
  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and reviewers' reports as confidential and not share them with anyone not authorized by the journal.
  • Timeliness: Reviews should be submitted within the timeframe agreed upon with the editor.

4. Author Responsibilities

  • Manuscript quality: Authors are responsible for submitting a manuscript that is well-written, original, and adheres to the journal's guidelines.
  • Author identification: Authors are required to disclose their affiliations, funding sources, and any potential conflicts of interest.
  • Responding to reviews: Authors should carefully consider the reviewers' comments and provide a detailed response outlining how they have addressed them.
  • Copyright: Authors must transfer copyright to the journal upon publication.

5. Appeals

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit an appeal. Appeals should be based on specific concerns about the review process or the editor's decision.