Peer review is used to help ensure the highest possible quality in published manuscripts. Scientists with expertise in the subject matter will evaluate the manuscript for validity of the experimental design and results, originality, significance, and appropriateness to the Journal. The Editors may exercise their prerogative to decline a manuscript without peer review if that paper is judged to be outside the scope of the Journal, poorly written or formatted, fragmentary and marginally incremental, or lacking in significance.

All manuscripts submitted are reviewed and handled by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned to one of the Editors. The Editors are then responsible for the assigned manuscripts, including evaluating the content and format of the paper, selecting reviewers, monitoring the progress of the review process, evaluating the comments of reviewers and forwarding them to the authors for their response, communicating ultimate acceptance or rejection to the corresponding author, and carrying out a final check of accepted manuscripts for appropriate format and style.

Typically, two reviewers are selected per paper on the basis of the subject matter, available expertise, and the Editor’s knowledge of the field. Reviewers are normally asked to provide their assessments within two weeks. Anonymous copies of the reviews and the Editor’s decision regarding the acceptability of the manuscript are sent to the corresponding author. If the reviewers’ evaluations of the manuscript disagree, or if reviewer’s and Editor’s comments are not satisfactorily addressed by the authors, the Editor may reject the manuscript or select additional reviewers. These additional reviews are used by the Editor to assist in reaching the final decision regarding disposition of the manuscript.