Peer Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to Journal of Heart and Lung Research (abbreviated as JHLR) are subjected to an initial assessment to determine if they meet the minimum editorial standards and are suitable for subsequent peer review.

Rejecting or accepting manuscript are at the discretion of journal editors, who will take (but not absolutely rely on) peer-reviewed comments into consideration. The manuscripts may be rejected in the presence of any concern proposed by a single reviewer or the editor. At the end of peer review process, the final decision from the editors, along with reviewing reports, will be sent to the authors.

JHLR adheres to the corresponding criteria in Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.

Peer Review Process
Privacy and Confidentiality
Conflicts of Interest of Peer Review
Publication Ethics Statement

1. Peer Review Process

JHLR complies with COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, using "double blind" review, which means during entire reviewing process, both reviewers and authors are undisclosed to each other.

The editorial board will suggest at least two experts to review submitted manuscripts. Additional review may happen if inconsistent reports are collected. The invited reviewers will be assigned appropriate tasks in accordance with their expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, conflicts of interest, etc.

Editors, reviewers and editorial staff participating in the review process shall disclose conflicts of interest with any author arising from competition, collaboration or other relationships, and avoid situations where such conflicts impact objective evaluation. External reviewers must avoid to review a submission when they have any potential interest that may affect the objectivity. Any competing interests of reviewers should be declared, which will be considered by the editors of JHLR. Disclosure of confidential information involving in the conversations between reviewers and editors to the third parties is not allowed.

Reviewers are responsible for proposing unbiased scientific opinions, disclosing any conflicts of interest, and submitting their comments within required time. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the paper contents. It is not permitted to display or discuss with others, except in special circumstances to whom specific advice can be sought. The identity of the consulted person should be disclosed to the editorial office. Reviewers are forbidden to use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations in their reviewed manuscript without authors' consent.

For the comprehensive assessment of manuscripts, reviewers may refer to following aspects:

⋄ Do the title and abstract cover the main aspects of the paper?

⋄ Is the rationale for the research clearly stated in the introduction in light of the available literature?

⋄ Is an existing problem comprehensively and critically assessed in the article in light of the available literature?

⋄ Did the study gain appropriate ethical approval and/or informed consent if human or animal subjects were involved ?

⋄ Are the methods clear and replicable?

⋄ Are sample quantities, repetitions, equipment and chemicals used explicitly mentioned?

⋄ Is the antibody catalog number provided?

⋄ Is the statistical analysis appropriate to the study design?

⋄ Is the main viewpoint clearly and logically described in the discussion by comparing the existing literature and the research findings?

⋄ Are conflicts of interest disclosed？

⋄ Is data from patient or animal assays properly documented?

⋄ Is English editing necessary for correcting the grammar or fluency?

For details about Editorial Policies, please refer to Editorial Policy.

2. Privacy and Confidentiality

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the paper contents. The authors entrust reviewers with their scientific research achievements and creative efforts, which is closely associated with their reputation and career. Therefore, reviewers should abide by professional ethics.

Reviewers are not allow to reproduce or share information of the manuscripts in the absence of authorization from authors. It is not permitted to display or discuss the contents with others, except in special circumstances to whom specific advice can be sought. The identity of the consulted person should be disclosed to the editorial office.

During processing stage, the editorial office will not leak information about the submitted manuscript (e.g., paper contents, review process status, peer review comments, editorial decisions, etc.) to anyone else, except for the authors and reviewers.

The right of the authors should be protected. Inappropriate discussion on authors' work or misuse of their ideas are not allowed prior to publication. These should be fully implemented by both reviewers and editors.

3. Conflicts of Interest of Peer Review

Editorial board members in JHLR can submit their own research work, but are not allowed to participate in its assessment process. Under such circumstance, alternative members in Editorial Board will take in charge of the article evaluation. Likewise, the manuscripts are independently reviewed by a minimum of two external reviewers. Final decisions to accept or reject the manuscript are not made by submitting editors, but other editorial board members who have no potential conflicts of interest regarding the authors or their submitted work.

4. Publication Ethics Statement

All parties involved in the act of publishing, including authors, reviewers and editors, should strictly conform to the highest level of professional ethical standards. Prior to submission, proper statistical investigations and thorough ethical reviews should be acquired from data owning organizations. Authors have an obligation to ensure that the submitted manuscript is original and morally acceptable.

JHLR adheres to the publication ethics guidelines from the following organizations:

⋄ International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)

⋄ Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

⋄ Council of Scientific Editors (CSE)

⋄ National Institutes of Health (NIH)

⋄ National Information Standards Organization (NISO)

⋄ World Medical Association (WMA)

⋄ World association of Medical editors (WAME)