Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts submitted to the European Journal of Musculoskeletal Diseases (EJMD) undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Office to determine whether they are suitable for the journal’s scope and meet the basic requirements for peer review. Manuscripts may be returned to authors at this stage if they do not meet the journal’s requirements or fall outside its scope.
Double-Blind Peer Review
Submissions considered suitable for the journal’s scope and standards are assigned for independent peer review. EJMD uses a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to one another. Manuscripts are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise.
Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected according to their expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. Reviewers are expected to provide an objective, independent and constructive assessment of the scientific quality, methodology, originality, relevance and clarity of the work.
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest and should decline the invitation if they are unable to provide an impartial assessment.
Evaluation and Editorial Decisions
Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript and provide comments and recommendations to assist the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor in reaching a decision.
Possible editorial decisions include:
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers’ comments carefully and provide a response explaining how each point has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.
Final Decision
Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor, based on the reviewers’ evaluations and editorial judgment.
The journal reserves the right to request additional review when necessary before a final decision is reached.
Confidentiality
The peer review process is confidential. Manuscripts, reviewer reports and related correspondence must not be shared or used for purposes unrelated to the review process.
Reviewers must not disclose the content of manuscripts or use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.
Conflicts of Interest
Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest that could affect the impartiality of the review process. Individuals with a conflict of interest should not participate in the evaluation or editorial decision-making process for the manuscript concerned.