1. Review Criteria
Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria:
(1) The material is original and timely;
(2) The manuscript is written clearly and in accordance with the guidelines for authors;
(3) Appropriate study methods have been used;
(4) The data are valid;
(5) The conclusions are reasonable and well supported by the data;
(6) The information contained in the manuscript is important and needs to align with the theme of the journal.
2. Peer Review Flowchart
Peer Review Mode: Journal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents (JBRHA) operates double-blind peer review, in which the referees remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the refereeing process, whilst the identity of the author(s) is likewise unknown to the reviewers.
Selection of Reviewers: Reviewer selection is based on expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, conflict of interest, etc.
(1) Pre-Check: All submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the journal Editor for compliance with guidelines for preparation of articles, the journal’s scope, standard guidelines, quality, novelty, and adherence to ethical issues. Articles that do not comply with the guidelines will be sent back to the authors.
(2) Peer review: a manuscript will be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. The selection of independent reviewers is crucial to the publication process. Our choices are based on numerous factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, and the quality of the reviewers' history of reporting on previous manuscripts reviewed for the journal. Efforts should be made to ensure they do not have any apparent conflicts of interest and to prevent bias in their assessment of the work under review. The peer review process will help editors make better decisions. Editors will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision, but are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. A concern raised by a single peer reviewer or the Editor themselves may result in the manuscript being rejected.
(3) Editor decision and revision: in cases where only minor revisions are recommended, the author is usually requested to revise the paper. Articles may or may not be sent to reviewers after the author’s revision, depending on whether the reviewer requested to see the revised version and the wishes of the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board Members recognized by the Editor-in-Chief in the relevant field of the manuscript. Apart from in exceptional circumstances, we allow a maximum of two rounds of major revision per manuscript.
(4) In-House Submissions: Additionally, to ensure the fairness of each manuscript, the JBRHA requires all editors to abstain from involvement in decisions regarding papers they have authored themselves, or those authored by family members or colleagues, as well as papers related to products or services of interest to the editor. Any such submissions must adhere to all regular procedures of the journal and undergo peer review independently of the involved editor and their research team.
3. Online Review System
To ensure the most convenient and efficient peer review process possible, our peer reviews are conducted electronically via the online review system (https://www.biolifesas.org/journalx_brha/expertLogOn.action)
