Peer review

All articles published in AJVS undergo thorough peer review, which usually involves review by at least two independent experts on the subject matter of the manuscript in a double-blind modality.

Peer-review policy

All submissions to AJVS are assessed by the Editorial Committee. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by appropriate independent experts identified by the Editorial Committee and may (but not necessarily) include those suggested by the author. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected. In case of a disagreement between the referee’s reports, a third referee will aid the Editorial Committee to reach a final decision regarding acceptance of the manuscript, according to the referees’ comments and their own.

Referees are obliged to keep all information from the articles confidential, including unpublished information.

Authors should state any potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission of the manuscript. Such information will not alter established editorial and review policies but will assist the editorial staff in avoiding any potential conflicts that could give the appearance of a biased review.

Where an Editor is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript, the other members of the Editorial board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review.