All manuscripts submitted to the IJ Radiology  undergo a rigorous and structured peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific integrity of the content.

Peer-review process plan

Upon submission, the corresponding author, acting on behalf of all co-authors, submits the manuscript through the journal’s online submission system.

The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial screening to verify whether the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies, including scope, article type, and adherence to formatting and ethical standards. Submissions that do not meet these basic criteria may be rejected at this stage without external review.

If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it is assigned to an Associate Editor with relevant expertise. The Associate Editor oversees the peer review process for that manuscript, including reviewer selection, communication, and evaluation. The manuscript is then sent to at least two independent peer reviewers with academic and research experience in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, publication history, and lack of conflicts of interest.

Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript independently and provides a detailed critique, which includes both general and specific comments, as well as a recommendation: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. The Associate Editor synthesizes the reviewer feedback, may add their own evaluation, and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.

In cases of conflicting reviews or borderline decisions, the Editor-in-Chief may consult additional reviewers or members of the editorial board to reach a balanced judgment. Based on the collective assessment, the Editor-in-Chief communicates one of the following decisions to the corresponding author:

Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication with no further changes required.

Minor Revision: Minor corrections are needed before final acceptance.

Major Revision: Substantial revisions are required; the revised manuscript will undergo re-evaluation.

Reject: The manuscript is unsuitable for publication in the journal.

If revisions are requested, the authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments within the specified timeframe. Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers or re-evaluated by the Associate Editor or Editor-in-Chief, depending on the extent of the changes.

Before final acceptance, all manuscripts undergo a structural review by the journal’s editorial office. This includes evaluation of the manuscript’s clarity, consistency, organization, figure and table formatting, reference accuracy, and compliance with journal style. If structural issues are identified at this stage, authors may be asked to submit another revision to address these concerns.

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account the reviewer feedback, Associate Editor’s recommendation, and the outcome of the structural review. Once accepted, the manuscript is scheduled for publication in a future issue of the journal.

Peer Review Process Diagram