Peer Review Process

Review Model

The journal follows a double-blind peer review model. Author identity is not disclosed to reviewers and reviewer identity is not disclosed to authors.

Review Steps

1. Technical and scope screening by the editorial office.
2. Initial editorial evaluation for relevance, structure and ethical completeness.
3. Reviewer assignment by the editorial team.
4. Double-blind review for originality, scientific quality, methodology, clarity and clinical relevance.
5. Editorial decision: accept, revise, reject or request further review.
6. Author revision and response to comments.
7. Final approval and production preparation.

Decision Principles

Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, ethical compliance, relevance to colorectal practice and clarity of reporting.