E-ISSN 2577-2058
 

Peer Review Policy



Peer Review Policy

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Review Policy and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.

Type of Peer Review

Policy employs double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

How the referee is selected

Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated.

Referee reports

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work.

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

How long does the review process take?

The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee's reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

Final report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.

Editor's Decision is final

Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.



Most Viewed Articles
  • Welcome to Journal of Diagnostic Imaging
    Editorial Team
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2016; 1(1): i-i
    » Abstract & References » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20160410223511

  • Pre-operative staging of carcinoma of tongue using Ultrasonography and Magnetic Resonance imaging
    Dr Nilu Malpani Dhoot, Dr Suman Hazarika, Dr Binoy Choudhury, Dr Amal chandra Kataki, Dr Hridayananda Goswami, Dr Ranjan Baruah, Dr Rajib Sharma
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2017; 2(1): 8-13
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20161226053617

  • MRI in diagnosing subclinical hip pointers.
    Ganesh Singh Dharmshaktu
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2016; 1(1): 9-9
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20160719030524

  • The Role Of Head CT Scans In The Evaluation of Acute Intracranial Injuries
    Kirill Alekseyev, Zachary Fallon, Malcolm Lakdawala, Adrian Cristian, Marc Ross
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2016; 1(1): 1-3
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20160714024653

  • Calcinosis cutis.
    Geetha Wickrematilake
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2016; 1(1): 7-8
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20160812011041

  • Most Downloaded
  • Oro-Antral Fistula: Radio-diagnostic lessons from a rare case.
    GEON PAULY, ROOPASHRI RAJESH KASHYAP, ROSHAN SHETTY, RAGHAVENDRA KINI, PRASANNA KUMAR RAO, GIRISH Y R
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2017; 2(1): 21-24
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20170616123139

  • Ultrasound Evaluation of Morphologic Changes of Transplanted Kidneys in Sudanese Patients
    Moawia Gameraddin
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2018; 3(1): 1-6
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20171124060523

  • Welcome to Journal of Diagnostic Imaging
    Editorial Team
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2016; 1(1): i-i
    » Abstract & References » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20160410223511

  • Crooked painful sacro-coccygeal region as presenting feature of osteomalacia A case report
    Ganesh Singh Dharmshaktu, Binit Singh, Alamgir Jhan
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2018; 3(1): 12-14
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20170902061321

  • 'Patellar tooth' sign revisited- An incidental CT finding
    Ganesh Singh Dharmshaktu,
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2019; 5(1): 15-16
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20181112014739

  • Most Cited Articles
  • CENTRAL GIANT CELL GRANULOMA- A CASE REPORT
    CHARVI CHAWLA, PRASANNA KUMAR RAO, RAGHAVENDRA KINI, GOWRI P BHANDARKAR, ROOPASHRI KASHYAP, VIDYA HOLLA
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2017; 2(1): 17-20
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20161219105205
    Cited : 1 time [Click to see citing article]

  • Development and design of an undergraduate radiology teaching e-portfolio for clinical practice and professional development
    Mohamed M Abuzaid, Wiam Elshami, Leena David, Zarmeena Noorjan, Asma Abdi
    A J Diagn Imaging. 2018; 3(1): 7-11
    » Abstract » doi: 10.5455/ajdi.20171008024201
    Cited : 1 time [Click to see citing article]