Peer review policy

User Rating: 5 / 5

Star ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar Active

Peer review policy

This policy describes the general principles operated by ESRAPM Publishing for its own journals and the majority of journals published on behalf of its partner organizations. Minor variations do exist and any journal-specific guidelines can be found in the Referee Guidelines link within each refereeing task.

Unbiased consideration is given to all manuscripts offered for publication regardless of race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

Our journals are international in authorship and in readership, and our referees are carefully selected from the international research community. We would be interested to hear from you if you wish to volunteer as a referee or if you wish to recommend a colleague who would be a suitable referee. In these cases nominations are approved by the Publisher, who carefully monitors our pool of referees.

Conflict of interest

Please contact us if you are asked to referee an article in the following instances: you are in direct competition with the authors you are a co-worker or collaborator with one of the authors you are in a position to exploit the authors' work (commercially or otherwise) you are in a position which prevents you from giving an objective opinion of the work. We will then select an alternative referee.

Referee reports

Referee reports are sent to the authors. You should bear this in mind when preparing your report. The identity of referees is strictly confidential and we ask that you do not transmit your report directly to the authors. We also ask that you do not disclose your identity to the authors or discuss the papers you have reviewed with colleagues unless they have been published.

Use of an adjudicator

For the cases when referees' reports are not in agreement, the paper and the referees' reports are sent to an adjudicator who is asked first to form his or her own opinion of the paper and then to read the referees' reports and adjudicate between them. If you, as a referee, are overruled by an adjudicator, we will let you know before the article appears in print.

Referees are asked to consider:

  1. Does the article exhibit a high degree of novelty?
  2. Is the research reported timely?
  3. Are the results significant enough to justify accelerated publication?
  4. Is the paper likely to be of interest to the journal's readership?
  5. Is the paper written in a clear and concise style?
  6. and to recommend:
  7. Acceptance (subject to minor amendments if required),
  8. Rejection, or consideration as a Paper (after revision in most cases).Top of Form



ESRAPM, as a new society, is committed to provide attendees with a state-of-the-art experience in

the field of regional anesthesia and pain medicine

Latest News

© 2015 All Rights Reserved. Designed By