Reviewer Guide

Ad Physicus strictly adheres to the principles set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) with regards to peer-review. Unbiased and constructively critical assessment is invaluable to any scientist hoping to publish their work. The peer-review process is meant to facilitate this critical assessment in a formal setting that not only facilitates the selection of article submissions appropriate for publication, but also aims to improve the quality of the submitted work.

All peer-review in Ad Physicus is unblinded and by submitting author invitation only. We believe it is important that authors and peer-reviewers feel a sense of accountability to each other and their work, and that by unblinding the peer-review process, this will promote a more thorough and hopefully constructive review process.

The submitting author should only recommend peer-reviewers who are experts in their respective fields as evidenced by a degree of higher education and/or appointment within an academic department. Peer-reviewers of medical reports will be required to have completed a medical degree program, and peer-reviews of other life science reports will be required to hold an advanced degree (Masters degree or higher) in their respective field. All peer-reviewers must be unbiased and abide by the ethical principles of peer-review defined by the ICMJE and COPE. Peer-reviewers who accept an invitation to review a submitted manuscript will be asked to disclose any relevant conflicts of interest. If a recommended peer-reviewer has relevant conflicts of interest that make it difficult for them to perform an unbiased and independent review of the submitted work, they will likely be removed from the list of possible peer-reviewers.

All peer-review comments must demonstrate thorough reading of the submitted manuscript, critical evaluation of the manuscript’s merits and deficits, and constructive criticism for the authors that will lead to improvement of the submitted work.

All manuscript submissions must be accompanied by 5 proposed peer-reviewers, and a minimum of 2 peer-reviewers must complete a peer-review of the submitted article that satisfies the above requirements. The assigned editor is responsible for determining whether or not the selected peer-reviewers are qualified and whether or not their submitted review satisfies the requirements of credible and constructive peer-review.