All articles published in “RAP” undergo thorough peer review. This usually involves review by two independent peer reviewers.
All submissions to “Joints” are assessed by an Editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review.
Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review with appropriate independent experts.
Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript.
Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected.
Closed peer review
“RAP” operate a closed peer review process. Reviewers will be treated anonymously and the pre-publication history of each article will not be made available online.
Authors are encouraged to suggest potential reviewers; however, it is at the Editor discretion whether to invite these reviewers.
Authors should avoid suggesting recent collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves and should not knowingly provide false information. Authors may exclude individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission.
Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process.