Table of Contents
Lecturio adheres to the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers, as outlined by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics: DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9.
All papers are assessed exclusively against Lecturio’s criteria for publication.
The principal reasons for rejection are if the paper:
- Does not fit the aims or scope of manuscripts published by Lecturio
- Does not meet the editorial requirements
- Does not provide adequate and didactically appropriate scientific explanations of the topics covered
- Introduces unethical experiments involving animals or humans
- Has major errors of commission or omission of content
- Has more than a few references that are irrelevant to the topic
- Has conclusions that are not supported by the evidence presented
- Contains plagiarized material, including self-plagiarized material
The principal reasons that a revision is requested are if:
- The scope of the review paper is more than needed (and can be adjusted)
- Some of the most recent articles on the topic are not included
- The figures need correcting, updating, or are of poor quality
- More information is needed (e.g., explanations, clarification)
- There are errors in grammar and/or the readability of the manuscript needs improvement
- Previous similar publications by Lecturio were not noted
- Lack of acknowledgment of the funding for the manuscript
Summary of the Peer Review Process at Lecturio
The author’s credentials are verified by the Managing Editor, who also checks the manuscript for proper scope and editorial requirements, as well as verifying that the paper is free of plagiarism. The manuscript may be rejected, sent back for further revisions to the author, or accepted and sent to the Editor in Chief, who performs an in-depth review to ensure that the information is accurate, up to date—with appropriate references—and presented in an ideal didactic format.
The Editor in Chief works full-time for Lecturio and is a U.S. Board-Certified physician with extensive experience and a proven background in medical education incorporating Learning Science methods. The Editor in Chief may reject the manuscript, revise it directly or send it back for further revisions to the author, or accept it and send it to the Associate Editor who re-reviews the manuscript using the same criteria as in the previous step before sending it to the Medical Copy Editor who checks all the text and images for language and adherence to our style guide. The Associate Editor then has the authority to publish the manuscript.