AMLR

ISSN online: 2284-5623

ISSN-L: 1841-6624

Rejection rate (2016): 55%

Română English


SCImago Journal & Country Rank


Advanced search


Top 10 downloaded articles
- October 2018 -
 
Biomarkers in heart failure: f... 14
Expanding PVL positive MRSA He... 13
Fungi in human pathology - are... 12
Biomarkers in Obesity... 11
Multiplex ligation dependent p... 7
Detection of anti-protease inh... 6
Rationale and Design of a Pros... 6
Arylesterase activity of Parao... 6
Evaluation of antioxidant, ant... 6
Associations of vascular calci... 6

Log in

Concept, Design & Programming
Dr. Adrian Man

 

Peer-review criteria

The reviewers have the responsibility to evaluate submitted manuscripts critically but constructively. They are expected to make an objective, impartial evaluation of scientific merits of the articles and are asked to comment on the following aspects of submitted manuscripts:

  • novelty and originality of the work
  • broad interest to the community of researchers
  • significance to the field
  • study design and clarity
  • rigorous methodology (including analytical and statistical methods)
  • conceptual or methodological advances described
  • impact of the work
  • substantial evidence supporting claims and conclusions
  • the strength of the conclusions

An important responsibility of the reviewer is to make recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in RJLabM. Reviewers are asked to write some narrative comments about the manuscript that support their recommendation to the editor regarding acceptance or rejection.

Reviewers have to declare to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors and to the content of a manuscript they are asked to review, and should then decline to review the manuscript. Any manuscript sent for peer review is a confidential document.

Once all reviews have been received and considered by the Editor, final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief. Several types of decisions are possible:

  • Accept without revision
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Accept after revision
  • Reject

The major rejection criteria are:

  • The subject matter is outside the scope of the journal or broad interest to the community of readers
  • A manuscript on the same topic is just about to be published
  • Lack of novelty or of the impact and originality of the work
  • Methodology (including analytical and statistical methods) is not rigorous (study design, the type of sampling and applied methods are not scientifically correct)
  • The quality of the manuscript is poor
  • The study was not approved by a competent ethics committee
  • The criteria for the submission of manuscripts are not met

The main reviewer's questions can be downloaded here.