Peer Review
Reviewer Information
The International Journal of MS Care (IJMSC), the official publication of the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers is a peer-reviewed, bronze open-access journal that focuses on the multidisciplinary care of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and related autoimmune disorders of the central nervous system. To maintain the quality of our publication, IJMSC editors invite qualified individuals to provide comprehensive peer reviews of submitted manuscripts.
Reviewers must have expertise in one or more of the following issues in multidisciplinary MS management:
- neurologic
- nursing
- rehabilitative
- psychological
- psychosocial
- quality of life
- symptom and comorbidity management
Become a Reviewer
To become a reviewer for IJMSC, please:
Step 1. Create a profile through our IJMSC eJournalPress website.
Step 2. Email your request to become a reviewer along with your CV to the editorial office at [email protected].
Peer Review Process
All manuscripts undergo an initial review by Francois Bethoux, MD, Editor in Chief, or Mary Alissa Willis, MD, Associate Editor, regarding topic relevancy, content, grammar, clinical or scientific accuracy, and editorial space availability. Once these initial processes are complete, the peer-review process begins.
Authors are asked to suggest 2 to 5 potential reviewers upon submission. The reviewing editor will identify the appropriate peer reviewers for the manuscript.
IJMSC uses a single-blind peer-review process: reviewers’ identities are not revealed to authors, but authors’ identities are not hidden from reviewers. Two reviewers are assigned to each manuscript. Peer reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest in reviewing specific manuscripts and disqualify themselves from a specific review if there is a potential for bias. In addition, reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality. Reviewers can accept or reject a manuscript or send it back for revision by including comments. Final acceptance decisions are made by the editor in chief and the corresponding author is notified of the decision by email.
Reviewers are asked to undertake two tasks: 1) rate the manuscript on predefined criteria; 2) provide detailed constructive comments on the manuscript, including confidential comments to the editor, and comments to the corresponding author; 3) recommend a decision (Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, Reject). While the overall recommendation is very valuable, both the ratings and detailed criticisms are essential parts of the review, as they provide essential input to the editor (to inform the editorial decision) and to the authors (to improve on the quality and scientific contribution of the manuscript). Reviewer comments are expected to cover, at a minimum, the following topics: quality of the writing, soundness of the methodology, validity of the results and conclusions, and contribution to the field.
Manuscripts are rarely accepted on the first review, and, in many instances, the reviewers are expected to comment on a revised manuscript. This collaborative process between authors, reviewers, and editor ensures that the articles published in IJMSC are of optimal quality. Reviewers are asked to put aside their personal research or beliefs to focus on the manuscript and to declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to undertaking the review.
Rejection appeals should be sent to the editor in chief with a rebuttal that fully addresses the reviewer comments. The manuscript's review will be investigated and the editor in chief will decide whether to obtain additional reviews or uphold the original decision. The final decision will then be conveyed to the author, and no further appeals will be considered.
The peer review process ensures journal and scientific integrity. Without it, our work would grind to a halt. If you are interested in being added to our peer review database, contact Charlene Belsole at [email protected].
