Peer Review Process

All research manuscripts and most other submissions to the Progress in Biomaterials undergo a peer review process. Typically, this involves evaluation by at least two independent expert reviewers using a single-blind review method.

Upon submission, manuscripts are first assessed by a professional Managing Editor to ensure they adhere to the journal’s ethical guidelines and formatting requirements. Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria will either be rejected outright or returned to authors for revision. If the manuscript meets these initial requirements, the Managing Editor, in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief or a Guest Editor (or another Editorial Board member in cases of conflict of interest), will determine if the submission aligns with the journal’s scope and is scientifically valid. At this stage, no assessment of the manuscript’s significance or potential impact is made. Any rejections at this stage must be confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief.

Peer Review

Once the manuscript clears the initial evaluation, it is sent to at least two independent external experts for peer review. The journal follows a single-blind review system, meaning reviewers know the authors’ identities, but not vice versa. Reviewer comments remain confidential unless explicitly agreed otherwise.

For regular submissions, in-house assistant editors invite reviewers, sometimes based on recommendations from an academic editor. Reviewers may also include Editorial Board members or Guest Editors. For special issues, the Guest Editor provides input on reviewer selection. Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but these must not have co-published with any of the manuscript’s authors in the last three years or have any ongoing professional collaboration with them.

Editorial Decisions and Revisions

All submitted manuscripts go through peer review and receive feedback from at least two reviewers. Based on this evaluation, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision and communicates it to the corresponding author. Possible outcomes include:

Authors are required to address all reviewer comments in detail. If they disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear, justified response.

Author Appeals

If a manuscript is rejected, authors can appeal by emailing the Editorial Office with a detailed justification and a point-by-point response to the reviewer and/or editorial feedback. The Managing Editor will then forward the appeal, along with relevant materials (including reviewer identities), to an appropriate Editorial Board member or, if necessary, an external expert. This reviewer will provide an advisory recommendation, which may result in acceptance, further peer review, or confirmation of the original rejection. Any rejection at this stage is final.

For special issues, the appeal process involves forwarding the manuscript and reviewer details to the Editor-in-Chief, who will provide an advisory recommendation. Again, if the rejection is upheld, this decision is final.

Production and Publication

Once accepted, a manuscript undergoes professional production, concluding with author proofreading and final corrections before publication in Progress in Biomaterials.