Peer Review Process

NeuScience is committed to rigorous, fair, and constructive peer review. We employ a single-blind peer review process where reviewer identities are kept confidential, but author identities are known to reviewers.

Our Review Philosophy

  • Rigor: Thorough evaluation of scientific quality and validity
  • Fairness: Objective assessment based on merit alone
  • Constructiveness: Feedback that helps authors improve their work
  • Timeliness: Efficient process respecting authors' time
  • Transparency: Clear communication throughout

Review Timeline

Initial Screening

3-5

days

Peer Review

4-6

weeks

Editorial Decision

5-7

days after reviews

Total Time

6-8

weeks typical

The Review Process Step-by-Step

1. Submission

Day 0

Author submits manuscript through our online system. Automatic acknowledgment sent immediately.

2. Initial Screening

Days 1-5

Editorial office checks: completeness, scope fit, formatting, plagiarism screening (iThenticate). Manuscripts may be returned at this stage for corrections.

3. Editor Assignment

Days 3-5

Handling Editor (Associate Editor) assigned based on subject expertise. Editor evaluates scientific merit and decides whether to send for external review.

4. Reviewer Invitation

Days 5-10

Editor identifies and invites 2-3 expert reviewers. Reviewers have expertise matching the manuscript's subject area and methodology.

5. Peer Review

Weeks 2-6

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide detailed feedback. Each reviewer is given 21 days to complete their review.

6. Editorial Decision

Week 6-7

Editor synthesizes reviewer feedback and makes a decision. Decision communicated to authors with reviewer comments.

7. Revision (if applicable)

Variable

Authors address reviewer comments and resubmit. Major revisions may undergo additional review.

8. Final Decision

1-2 weeks after revision

Accept or reject. Accepted manuscripts proceed to production.

9. Production & Publication

2-3 weeks

Copyediting, typesetting, author proofs, final corrections, online publication with DOI.

Decision Types

Decision Meaning What Happens Next
Accept Manuscript accepted as submitted or with minor editorial changes Proceeds directly to production
Minor Revision Small changes required; typically does not require re-review Authors revise and resubmit; Editor reviews
Major Revision Substantial changes needed; manuscript has merit but significant issues Authors revise; undergoes second round of review
Reject & Resubmit Fundamental issues, but topic of interest; may resubmit as new submission Substantial rewrite; treated as new submission
Reject Not suitable for publication; out of scope, insufficient quality, or major flaws No further action; authors may submit elsewhere

What Reviewers Assess

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

Scientific Quality

  • Originality and novelty of findings
  • Significance and impact
  • Validity of conclusions
  • Appropriateness of methodology
  • Statistical rigor
  • Reproducibility

Presentation

  • Clarity and organization
  • Quality of writing
  • Adequacy of literature review
  • Quality of figures and tables
  • Completeness of reporting
  • Ethical compliance

Appeals Process

Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly rejected may appeal by writing to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision. Appeals should provide:

  • Point-by-point response to reviewer/editor concerns
  • Specific reasons why the decision should be reconsidered
  • Any new data or information not previously available

Submit appeals to: neuscience@neucitepress.com

Contact

Submission Status

⚖️ Appeals