Peer Review Process
When a manuscript is submitted to a Science Partner Journal, it first goes through a technical check by the editorial office. This ensures all necessary items are included in the submission prior to sending to a scientific editor for evaluation. In addition, the Health Data Science Editorial Office is responsible for evaluating whether the submission fits the journal's aim and scope. Only if a manuscript passes this internal evaluation will it be assigned to a scientific editor for further evaluation from a scientific perspective. Those manuscripts that warrant further consideration for publication are sent out for in-depth peer review by external reviewers.
Peer Review Model
All Science Partner Journals operate under a single-blind peer review process. This means that editors and reviewers know the identity of the authors, however, the authors do not know the identity of the editors or reviewers. The reviewers’ identifies are also kept anonymous from each other.
Decision Making Process
A decision can be made at any point in the evaluation process to reject the manuscript, whether this be without review, or with two reviews. No manuscript will be accepted without peer review, discussion among editors and approval from Deputy Editors.
The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication and must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should destroy all copies of the manuscript after review and not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor. Reviewers should not make personal or professional use of the data or interpretations before publication without the authors’ specific permission (unless they are invited to write an editorial or commentary to accompany the article).
Conflicts of Interest
If a reviewer cannot judge a paper impartially, they should not accept the invitation to review it. If a reviewer has any professional, personal, or financial affiliations that are or even may be perceived as a conflict of interest in reviewing the manuscript, they should not accept the invitation for review, or, if this conflict of interest is uncovered after seeing the full manuscript materials, they should recuse themselves immediately and fully inform the journal editors. If there is an aspect of a manuscript that a reviewer does not feel they are qualified to evaluate, they should inform the editor.