Jump To

Peer Review Process

The Editor-in-Chief screens all submissions and rejects those that are inconsistent with the journal’s expressed mission, audience, and/or content needs or that fail to conform to the Instructions for Authors.

Original research papers undergo the standard double-blind peer-review process using reviewers with expertise in the subject area represented by each manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief guides the manuscript through the review process, choosing at least two reviewers from the journal’s pool of Editorial Board members and reviewers.

Practice-related manuscripts are reviewed by at least one other subject matter expert, usually, but not always, a member of the journal’s Editorial Board, at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief. At the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, manuscripts may be sent to one or more additional reviewers selected for their expertise in the subject matter, particularly in cases involving country-specific conditions or regulations.

Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and the journal will not reveal the identity of the reviewers, for any particular manuscript. However, the journal will acknowledge and publicly thank reviewers as a group once a year online. To ensure unbiased, independent, and critical assessments, reviewers are selected in accordance with international conflict-of-interest guidelines. Each reviewer has signed a statement reporting any conflicts-of-interest. Members of the Editorial Board have signed similar statements.

Once reviews are complete, the Managing Editor synthesizes the comments and provides input to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief reviews the manuscript together with all comments and makes the decision to accept, request revisions, or reject. The decision is e-mailed to the corresponding author.

If revision is required, detailed instructions will be e-mailed to the corresponding author with consolidated comments from all reviewers. A point-by-point response is required to the reviewers’ comments. (Full instructions will be provided in the decision letter.) A re-review may be required.

Reviews of manuscripts in which the Editor-in-Chief or one of the members of the Editorial Board is an author are conducted confidentially by another member of the Editorial Board.

Rejection by another journal prior to submission to the International Journal of Eye Banking does not preclude consideration by this journal, particularly in cases where the manuscript might have been accepted by the first journal except for reasons of time, space, or editorial priority. If your manuscript has been previously rejected in any form by another journal, please note the reason(s) why and describe how you have improved the manuscript.