All Articles published in CJIC go through at least one round of review, usually two or more. At each stage, the editor-in-chief will discuss the manuscript with editorial colleagues in the light of referees’ reports, and the associate editor will send a letter to the author offering one of the following options:
- The paper is accepted for publication without any further changes required from the authors.
- The paper is accepted for publication in principle once the authors have made some revisions in response to the reviewers’ comments. In this case, the revised paper may not be sent back to the reviewers but are accepted for publication once the editors have checked that the reviewers’ comments have been addressed.
- A final decision on publication is deferred, pending the authors’ response to the reviewers’ comments. In such cases, further technical work or analyses may be required to address some or all of the reviewers’ concerns, and revised papers are sent back to some or all of the reviwers for a second opinion. Revised papers should be accompanied by a point-by-point response to all the comments made by all the reviewers.
- The paper is rejected because the reviewers have raised considerable technical objections and/or the authors’ claim has not been adequately established. However, if the authors feel that they have a strong scientific case for reconsideration, they can appeal the decision in writing. In the appeal, authors are encouraged to articulate specific points of interest which they think may had been missed by the reviewers and editors previously. Appeals written in general or vague terms, or that contain arguments not relevant to the content of the particular manuscript, are not likely to be successful. Manuscripts cannot be submitted elsewhere while an appeal is being considered.
Hints to authors: In replying to the reviewers’ comments, authors are advised to use language that would not cause offence when their paper is sent again to the reviewers or reassessed by the editors. It is particularly important to bear in mind that if a point was not clear to the reviewers and/or editors, it is unlikely that it would be clear to other readers in the field.
Appreciation to reviewers
CJIC would like to thank all peer reviewers who contributed their time and expertise to the journal. The contribution of these individuals has been vital to enhancing the quality of articles published in CJIC and advancing the practice of infection prevention and control.
We believe that all research should be freely available. To support this policy, manuscripts are accepted for publication at no cost to the authors.