Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Insights into the AJNR Review Process

Insights into the AJNR Review Process EDITORIAL publication. This acceptance rate is nearly identical to that found Insights into the AJNR Review in our study for AJNR (ie, 25.2% for the past 5 years, 26.9% for Process the past year). We devoted a large part of our analysis to the reviews and M.D. Alvin, reviewers. First, we found that most manuscripts were reviewed C. Toote, and J.S. Ross either by 2 reviewers or the Editor-in-Chief or Senior Editor alone. This finding was expected as the Senior Editor is tasked anuscript peer review is a critical process to ensure that with sorting through a portion of all submitted manuscripts and Mpublished manuscripts are scientifically and methodologi- selecting only a subset to be sent to reviewers while rejecting the cally sound. While the general process is straightforward, the spe- rest. The Editor-in-Chief will also accept some manuscripts with- cifics can be complicated and, from the outside, very opaque. The out review, generally limited to Editorials, Brief Reports, or type of peer review is not standardized across journals, and the Perspectives rather than Original Research articles. We also number of reviewers and the impact of reviewers’ recommenda- found that the more reviews a manuscript underwent, the less tions http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Neuroradiology American Journal of Neuroradiology

Insights into the AJNR Review Process

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-journal-of-neuroradiology/insights-into-the-ajnr-review-process-TCUtHCPmuP
Publisher
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Copyright
© 2021 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
ISSN
0195-6108
eISSN
1936-959X
DOI
10.3174/ajnr.A7090
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

EDITORIAL publication. This acceptance rate is nearly identical to that found Insights into the AJNR Review in our study for AJNR (ie, 25.2% for the past 5 years, 26.9% for Process the past year). We devoted a large part of our analysis to the reviews and M.D. Alvin, reviewers. First, we found that most manuscripts were reviewed C. Toote, and J.S. Ross either by 2 reviewers or the Editor-in-Chief or Senior Editor alone. This finding was expected as the Senior Editor is tasked anuscript peer review is a critical process to ensure that with sorting through a portion of all submitted manuscripts and Mpublished manuscripts are scientifically and methodologi- selecting only a subset to be sent to reviewers while rejecting the cally sound. While the general process is straightforward, the spe- rest. The Editor-in-Chief will also accept some manuscripts with- cifics can be complicated and, from the outside, very opaque. The out review, generally limited to Editorials, Brief Reports, or type of peer review is not standardized across journals, and the Perspectives rather than Original Research articles. We also number of reviewers and the impact of reviewers’ recommenda- found that the more reviews a manuscript underwent, the less tions

Journal

American Journal of NeuroradiologyAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology

Published: Jun 1, 2021

References