This Article Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Copyright Permission Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Caron, M. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Caron, M. G.

ENDOCRINE REVIEWS and the Peer-Review Process

As I begin the second year of my 5-yr term as Editor-in-Chief of Endocrine Reviews, I want to take this opportunity to describe the peer-review process used to select articles for publication. I hope that this will be useful to both readers and potential authors.

Manuscripts enter the peer-review process as either solicited or unsolicited papers. For solicited papers, the Editors draw on various sources , such as the Advisory and Editorial Boards, to determine interesting and timely subjects for review and the names of potential contributors. After careful consideration, prospective authors are issued an invitation. For unsolicited proposals, a preliminary review process is conducted by the Editors to determine not only appropriateness but whether subject overlap might exist with any current or upcoming manuscript. With more than 80 manuscripts routinely in the works, unsolicited proposals are often deemed inappropriate on the basis of overlap in subject matter. If the proposal is accepted, it then undergoes the same process and is given the same priority as a solicited manuscript.

Because of their length and breadth, manuscripts are reviewed by three to five referees who submit comments to the Editors. If the decision is made to consider the paper further, the referees’ comments, along with the Editor’s recommendations, are passed along to the authors, who are asked to prepare an appropriately revised manuscript. Once a revised manuscript has been received, it is usually reviewed again by several of the original referees before being accepted. Although the attrition rate is low, rejections do occur, even if the manuscript has been solicited by the Editors.

It is important to note that a large part of the success of the Endocrine Reviews peer-review process is due to the thoroughness of our referees. When selecting referees, the Editors do not work from a standard list, but instead select only those senior researchers who can constructively remark upon the work done by the authors. While this method often lengthens the time needed for an initial review, authors are usually pleased with the thorough, insightful, and constructive comments they receive.

The highly cited, authoritative articles published in Endocrine Reviews are the result of a long, careful process that requires the combined effort of authors and referees. Both groups are to be commended for their dedication and hard work.

In closing, I would like to encourage readers/prospective authors to communicate with the Editorial Office if you have any questions regarding the peer-review process or wish to make any suggestions for topics to be reviewed.

This Article Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Copyright Permission Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Caron, M. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Caron, M. G.