Open Peer Review

At Prime Peer, every manuscript undergoes a rigorous, two-step screening before external review:

1. Integrity Check – All submissions are scanned for plagiarism using advanced software and verified manually.
2. Editorial Triage – Editors assess scope, relevance, ethical compliance, and basic scientific quality. Only manuscripts that pass both stages proceed to peer review.

Prime Peer uses a double-blind peer review model: authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the process. A minimum of three independent reviews is required to ensure balanced, high-quality feedback.

Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review safeguards research integrity by validating the originality, rigor, and significance of submitted work. Expert reviewers evaluate:

• Soundness of study design and methodology
• Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation
• Novelty and impact on the field
• Clarity, coherence, and completeness of reporting

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

For All Articles	For Research Articles (Additional)
Logical structure and readability	Clearly defined research question
Availability of underlying data/code	Appropriateness of study design and participant selection
Ethical compliance	Adequacy of methods and reporting checklists
Novelty relative to existing literature	Credibility and presentation of results
Adequacy and currency of references	Justification of conclusions in light of data and prior evidence

Reviewers should provide constructive, evidence-based critiques with relevant citations.

Reviewer Code of Conduct

Prime Peer follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. By accepting an invitation, reviewers agree to:

• Declare conflicts of interest (financial, professional, personal, or ideological).
• Maintain strict confidentiality; manuscripts are private intellectual property until publication.
• Deliver reviews on time or promptly decline if unavailable.
• Report suspected misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, ethical breaches) in confidence to the editor.
• Provide fair, courteous, and objective feedback free of personal remarks.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Assignment – An editor selects qualified reviewers based on subject expertise.
2. Review – Reviewers submit detailed reports and a recommendation (accept, minor/major revision, reject).
3. Editorial Decision – The editor weighs all feedback and issues a decision letter.
4. Revision – Authors address comments point-by-point and submit a tracked-changes manuscript.
5. Reevaluation – Revised papers may be sent back to original or new reviewers. Multiple revision rounds are possible.
6. Acceptance – Once all concerns are resolved, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting and production.

Average time to first decision is posted on each journal’s homepage; delays are communicated transparently.

Manuscript Withdrawal

• Before peer review – No fee.
• During review but prior to acceptance – USD 199 to offset incurred costs.
• After acceptance, before publication – 50 % of the invoiced APC.

Withdrawal requests must come from the corresponding author and include a justification.

Recognition for Reviewers

Prime Peer values reviewer contributions and offers:

• Publons/ORCID credit to verify and showcase review activity.
• 25 % APC discount on one submission as corresponding author within 12 months of a completed review.
• Digital certificates on request.

Become a Reviewer

Staying current with the literature, expanding professional networks, and enhancing academic credentials are just a few benefits of reviewing. To volunteer:

1. Register an account on the Prime Peer submission portal.
2. Update your expertise keywords and ORCID iD.
3. Accept our Peer Reviewer Terms & Conditions.

The editorial team will match new reviewers to suitable manuscripts as opportunities arise.

Prime Peer is committed to transparent, fair, and timely peer review—ensuring every published article meets the highest standards of scientific excellence.