Peer Review Process

Peer Review

Submitted manuscripts judged by the Editor-in-Chief to be of potential interest to the
biomedical scientific community are sent for formal review and critical assessment to
expert reviewers (at least two/manuscript).

Reviewer selection is of utmost importance and the Editor-in-Chief bases his choice on
such factors as expertise, scientific reputation, specific recommendations etc.

The work, effort and time spent by the reviewers on evaluating articles submitted
for publication in Romanian Archives of Microbiology and Immunology are gratefully
acknowledged and highly appreciated.

To the extent to which manuscripts are authors’ private property and authors may be
harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details, reviewers should
keep manuscripts and the information therein strictly confidential.

Also, reviewers should declare their conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from
the peer-review process if a conflict exists.

In a critical yet constructive manner, reviewers are expected to evaluate submitted
manuscripts and comment on such aspects as:
- relevance of the manuscript to the journal
- novelty and originality
- clarity
- technical quality
- importance of the subject matter related to state-of-the-art in the respective field
- satisfactory presentation of data and conclusions that are clearly supported and
derived from presented data

When reviewers accept to assess a paper, we understand that they implicitly agree to
review all subsequent revisions, in case these are necessary.

After reading the manuscripts, the reviewers may make the following recommendations
to the editor:
- accept the manuscript, with or without minor/major revision
- reject the manuscript, but indicate to the authors that further work might improve the
paper and justify resubmission
- reject the manuscript outright on lack of novelty of the information included in the
paper, outdated references, major technical / interpretational problems etc.

The reviewers are kindly expected to write some comments about the manuscript in
support of their recommendations, besides filling out the peer-review form.
In case one reviewer opposes publication and the other/others does/do not, the Editorin-Chief
may bring in additional reviewers to resolve the dispute.
The Editorial Team informs the corresponding author of the manuscript within 90
week days after submission that the paper is accepted for publication in the journal, needs
minor/major revision or is rejected. Revised manuscripts should be resubmitted as soon as
possible but not later than 14 week days.
Manuscripts revised by the authors according to reviewers’ observations and
recommendations are revised by the reviewers/Editor-in-Chief.