Peer Review Policy

Overall the purpose of peer review is to ensure that papers with good science make it to publication. Tomography uses peer-review to ensure that all article published meet objective scientific standards. Each referee provides an important service in maintaining high quality manuscripts. All article which are published in Tomography undergo peer review as outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation. The editor provides an initial evaluation of all manuscripts. Manuscripts may be rejected at this early stage if they are found to be insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. The editor also reviews the manuscript for meeting expected ethical guidelines for both animal and human use of these are part of the research study.

Peer Review. Tomography uses a double blind reviewing approach wherein both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

Referee selection. Referees are typically matched to the paper according to their expertise in the field of research using our database of reviewers and list of Editorial Board members. All reviewers are asked to provide timely reports within 14 days back to the editorial office. This is accomplished using our on-line peer review software system.

Referee reports. Referees are requested to provide a thorough evaluation of the manuscript with comments on originality, was the methodology used proper for the study, were appropriate ethical guidelines followed, were the results clearly presented and support the conclusions, review of figures for quality, presentation and correctness and a review of the use of references to ensure proper credit is given to previous relevant work. Typically reviewers also comment on language and grammar as part of suggestions to the authors and editors.

Time for review process. While the time needed to complete the overall review process can vary with the referee’s schedules, Tomography requests that referees complete their reports within a 2 week time line.
Editorial decision. In the event that the report of a referee contradicts another reviewers report or if there is an unanticipated delay in receiving all of the reports, additional request will be made to experts to allow for sufficient information to be obtained to render a publication decision. Occasionally, in cases in which a second referee was unavailable for reviewing the manuscript or when the report of a referee was thorough to allow the editor to make an informed decision, a decision on the basis of a single referee’s report may be made. The editor’s decision will then be sent to the author along with referees recommendations. Following receipt of a revised manuscript, revised manuscripts may be returned to the initial referees who following review, may request another round of revisions to the manuscript. A final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript will be sent to the author.

The editor makes the final decision on publication. While referees provide invaluable service to the scientific peer-review process as advisors to the editor for individual manuscripts, it is the editor who is responsible for the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of each article submitted to Tomography.