Peer review at IP

Injury Prevention reviews all unsolicited submissions. About 30% are rejected after screening usually because they are not original, are scientifically flawed, have little to do with prevention, or represent a exceptionally narrow or parochial aspect of the problem. A decision on such papers is usually made within 7 days.

The remaining articles are sent to one of the Associate Editors who will send it one or more external reviewers. The paper may also be sent to a specialist statistical reviewer.

Reviewers and Associate Editors advise the Editor who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript. All papers recommended for acceptance are discussed at a bi-weekly editorial meeting; at this time it may be agreed to commisison a Perspective (commentary) to accompany the paper.

The Editor can enter into correspondence about papers rejected as being unsuitable for publication, although the editors decision in these matters is final. The Editor retains the customary right to determine style and, if necessary, to shorten material accepted for publication.

We operate an optional system of open peer review. This means that reviewers can sign their reports if they wish. Open peer review does not mean that authors should contact reviewers directly to discuss their reports; all queries should still be directed through the editorial office.

View more information about open peer review.