Our Review Model

MedHorizons uses single-blind peer review by default, in which reviewers know the identities of authors but authors do not know the identities of reviewers. Double-blind review, where both parties are anonymous, is available upon request at submission.

Every submitted manuscript that passes editorial assessment is evaluated by a minimum of two independent expert reviewers with relevant domain expertise. Reviewers are selected from our global database of over 90,000 active researchers.

Reviewer reports are provided in full to authors. We do not edit or summarise reviewer comments. Where reviewer opinions diverge significantly, a third reviewer or the handling editor's judgement is used to reach a final decision.

What Reviewers Evaluate

  • ›Scientific validity: Is the study design appropriate? Are the methods sound? Are the conclusions supported by the data?
  • ›Novelty and significance: Does the work advance the field? Is it meaningfully new relative to published literature?
  • ›Reproducibility: Are methods described with sufficient detail? Are datasets and code made available?
  • ›Ethics: Has appropriate ethical approval been obtained? Are patient privacy and animal welfare standards upheld?
  • ›Clarity: Is the manuscript well-written and logically structured? Can the conclusions be followed from the evidence?

Timeline Commitments

2
days — technical check
14
days — first editorial decision
21
days — reviewer report deadline

Become a Reviewer

We welcome applications from active researchers with a relevant publication record. Reviewers receive formal acknowledgement in our annual Reviewer Recognition Programme and are eligible for APC discounts on their own submissions.

Apply to review →