Reviewer Policies

Reviewer Policies

1.    Reviewers Guidelines
2.    Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (specific to reviewers)

Reviewers Guidelines

The Reviewers Guidelines for Research and Practice in Anesthesiology – Open Journal are designed to ensure that the peer review process is fair, thorough, and contributes to the overall quality and integrity of the journal. Reviewers are expected to assess the scientific merit of the manuscript, evaluating factors such as the clarity of the research objectives, the soundness of the methodology, the rigor of the analysis, and the validity of the conclusions. In addition, reviewers should evaluate the relevance of the study to the field of anesthesiology and its potential impact on clinical practice. Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive feedback that will help the authors improve their manuscript, with a focus on ensuring accuracy and clarity. The journal follows a double-blind review process, which means that both the identities of the reviewers and the authors are kept confidential to avoid bias. Reviewers should also ensure that the manuscript adheres to ethical standards, particularly with respect to patient confidentiality, informed consent, and the ethical treatment of human and animal subjects. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality about the manuscript and refrain from using any information from the submission for personal or professional advantage. This structured approach ensures high-quality peer reviews and helps maintain the journal's integrity.

Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (specific to reviewers)

The Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures policy for Research and Practice in Anesthesiology – Open Journal requires that reviewers disclose any financial or personal relationships that could influence their impartiality during the manuscript review process. This includes any affiliations with institutions, companies, or organizations that could benefit from the publication of the research. Reviewers must disclose if they have financial ties, such as consulting fees, grants, or stock ownership, with entities related to the research topic. The policy also covers non-financial conflicts, including professional relationships or personal connections to the authors. The goal of this policy is to maintain transparency and ensure that the peer review process remains unbiased and objective. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest, they are expected to recuse themselves from evaluating that manuscript. The journal relies on these disclosures to assess whether a reviewer's impartiality might be compromised. Reviewers are required to submit their conflict of interest statements prior to agreeing to review a manuscript, and the editorial team will assess whether a reviewer’s disclosed conflicts pose any risk to the objectivity of the review process. By enforcing this policy, Research and Practice in Anesthesiology – Open Journal upholds the highest ethical standards in the peer review process, ensuring fair and transparent evaluations.