Peer Review Process

Authors are responsible for following the criteria for the manuscript categories listed above – in publication ethics- before submitting the article to the Editorial office.

Review process:All articles will undergo an initial review by an advisory board Editor, and then at least 2 independent reviewers are assigned per article for a systematic review of the article's aims, methodology, results and conclusions through a double blind peer review process.

Following peer review, articles may be accepted without revision, accepted pending minor revision, not accepted but eligible for re-submission following major revision, or rejected. No more than two revision cycles are permitted per article - articles that after two revisions have still not adequately addressed the reviewers and specialty Editors concerns will be rejected.

Authors are advised that during the review process the reviewers and/or the Editor may request additional statistical and language review. These articles will be reviewed by respectively an independent statistical advisor and language Editor to the journal, either of whom may subsequently request additional changes prior to final acceptance of the manuscript.

Human and non-human experimentation: The Editors require that manuscripts from a particular institution are submitted with the requisite authority (Ethical Committee). Reports of experiments on animals should state that the guidelines for the care and use of animals approved by the local institution were followed. For work described in your article involving human experimental investigations of any kind, must have been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the Declaration of Helsinki

Clinical Trials: The Editors of Annals of Neonatology encourage authors of reports of clinical trials to use the CONSORT checklist. When reporting a cluster or randomized trial, you can The CONSORT E-Flowchart and a checklist of items to be included can check CONSORT Checklist online. The journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations. The ICMJE's recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals are available online. 

Commercial potential: Authors who believe there may be commercial interest in their article, e.g. for advertising or reprints, are requested to provide brief notes on the reason why this might be the case and indicate the company or types of company that might be interested in this service.

Authorship: Each author should qualify by having significantly participated in the study that is reported as well as made substantial contributions to the first concept and design or analysis and interpretation of data and second, writing the manuscript or revising it critically for content. Others contributing to the work should be recognized separately in an acknowledgment after the conclusions and before references.

Peer review processing: All the articles submitted will undergo double-blind peer review processing to meet international standards. The editor handles the complete editorial process of the articles and peer reviewers remain anonymous to the authors. Editor decisions are strictly followed for quality publications.

Reviewer's guidelines: Judgments in peer reviewing should be objective. The process of peer reviewing depends to a large extent on trust, and requires that everyone involved behaves responsibly and ethically. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited. Reviewed articles should be treated confidentially; reviewers therefore should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers must not publicly discuss authors’ work and must not appropriate authors’ ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews. Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests to review and to submit reviews within the time agreed. Reviewers’ comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.

Withdrawal of the manuscript: Is available only for the corresponding author during any step of reviewing processing until acceptance of the manuscript.

All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. Permitted reuse is defined by Creative Commons user licenses (CC-BY-NC-ND).

Quality control: Our quality control team will help to analyze the quality of the manuscripts as per international standards.