Peer-Review Policy

The Journal of Cancer Research and Reviews employs a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scientific merit of all submitted articles. Key features of this process include:

Peer-Review Assignment

• Upon passing initial editorial checks, manuscripts are sent to a minimum of two independent experts for evaluation.
• The journal follows a double-blind peer-review model, in which both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are kept confidential to minimize bias.
• Peer-review comments are confidential and disclosed only with the explicit consent of the reviewer.

Characteristics of the Peer-Review Process

• All research articles are evaluated by at least two qualified experts in the relevant field.
• Reviewers are given a 21-day timeframe to complete their assessments. If a reviewer does not respond within this period, the invitation is withdrawn, and an alternative reviewer is assigned.

Communication with Corresponding Author

• The corresponding author receives an email once reviewer comments are submitted.
• The Editor conveys these comments to the corresponding author, with or without additional editorial remarks.
• The corresponding author is expected to submit a revised manuscript addressing all reviewer and editorial comments within three weeks.
• Failure to submit revisions within the stipulated timeframe may result in rejection of the manuscript and removal of its metadata from the system.

Revised Manuscripts

• If necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for reassessment.

Publication Decision

• Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or an appointed editorial board member, based on the reviewers’ evaluations.

Timeline

• Assuming a smooth progression from submission to revision, a typical timeframe of 6–8 weeks is required for a decision regarding acceptance or rejection.