Peer Review Policy

1. Editorial Screening

Every submission is checked for scope, completeness, originality, reporting quality, ethical compliance, patient consent where relevant, conflicts of interest, and basic methodological or clinical validity. A manuscript may be declined at this stage when it is outside the journal scope, incomplete, unethical, or clearly below the journal standard. Editorial screening is not acceptance.

2. Independent Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass screening are evaluated through double-anonymous peer review: reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors and author identities are not disclosed to reviewers. Each manuscript must receive reports from at least three independent reviewers with relevant expertise before an editorial decision. No manuscript is accepted without independent peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection and Independence

Editors select reviewers on the basis of expertise, availability, independence, and absence of conflicts. Reviewers must disclose financial, personal, professional, academic, institutional, competitive, or collaborative interests and decline when impartial review cannot be assured. Editors do not select reviewers solely from the authors' institution or personal network.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers assess originality, scientific or clinical validity, ethical compliance, methods, interpretation, clarity, reporting quality, references, and relevance. Case reports are additionally assessed for CARE reporting, clinical timeline, diagnostic and therapeutic reasoning, educational value, written consent for publication, and protection of patient identity.

5. Revision and Decision

Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and must provide a point-by-point response. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers. Decisions are: accept, minor revision, major revision, resubmit for review, or decline. The editor makes the final decision after considering the complete record and at least three independent reviews; acceptance is never automatic.

6. Timeliness and Confidentiality

Reviewers are normally asked to respond to an invitation within one week and complete a review within two weeks. Complex manuscripts may require additional time. Manuscripts, files, correspondence, and unpublished findings are confidential and must not be uploaded to generative AI systems or external services.

7. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by sending a reasoned request with evidence to editors.amcr@gmail.com. Appeals are considered by an editor who was not solely responsible for the original decision whenever practicable. A disagreement with reviewer opinion alone is not sufficient without substantive evidence.