October 31, 2025

Peer Review Policy

1. Peer Review Model
Frontiers in Preventive Medicine employs a Double-Anonymous Peer Review process to ensure impartiality and fairness. This means that:

  • The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.

  • The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

Both parties remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process.

2. Review Process Workflow
The review process for each submitted manuscript follows these key stages:

  1. Initial Editorial Check: The Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor performs an initial quality check for scope, formatting, plagiarism, and overall suitability.

  2. Assignment to Associate Editor: If the manuscript passes the initial check, it is assigned to an Associate Editor (a subject-area expert) who manages the subsequent peer review.

  3. Invitation to Reviewers: The Associate Editor invites at least two independent and qualified experts to review the manuscript.

  4. Review Period: Reviewers are given a specific timeframe to evaluate the manuscript based on originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and adherence to ethical standards.

  5. Decision Recommendation: Reviewers submit their reports with a recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject).

  6. Editorial Decision: The Associate Editor, considering the reviewers' comments, makes a final decision which is communicated to the corresponding author by the Editor-in-Chief.

3. Criteria for Review
Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts on the following criteria:

  • Originality and Novelty

  • Methodological Soundness and statistical validity

  • Scholarly Significance and relevance to the field of preventive medicine

  • Clarity of Presentation and logical structure

  • Ethical Compliance in research conduct and reporting

  • Adequacy of References

4. Revision Process
Manuscripts that require revision will be returned to the authors. Authors are expected to submit a revised version along with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.

5. Confidentiality and Ethics
All individuals involved in the review process—editors and reviewers—must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not disclose any information about the manuscript during or after the review process to anyone other than the editorial team.

Our peer review process adheres to the guidelines and standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).