Skip to main content

Peer-review policy

Peer-review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether the manuscript should be published in their journal. You can read more about the peer-review process here.

Implementation Science Communications operates an open peer-review system, where the reviewers' names are included on the peer review reports for authors. In addition, if the article is published, the named reviewer reports are published online alongside the article under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. Previous versions of the manuscript and all author responses to the reviewers are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

The benefit of open peer review is that it increases transparency. The peer reviewers and Editors are fully accountable for the decisions made, bias is reduced as reviewer reports are named, published reports can serve an educational purpose in helping facilitate training and research into peer review, and reviewers can get credit for their work. 

Manuscripts are first assessed by the Editors-in-Chief and may be rejected at this stage. Manuscripts not rejected at this stage will be assigned to a Handling Editor who will oversee the review process. For manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review, two or more expert reviews will be sought. Reviewers may be members of the Editorial Board or other experts in the field. Reviewers are asked to declare any competing interests they may have in reviewing a manuscript.  All final accept or reject decisions are made by the Editors-in-Chief.

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Speed
26 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median)
148 days submission to accept (Median)

2022 Usage 
427,166 downloads
3,629 Altmetric mentions

More about our metrics