Editor Guidelines
Responsibilities and best practices for Nephrology Advances editorial board members maintaining publication excellence.
Editorial Excellence in Kidney Science
Nephrology Advances editors ensure rigorous, fair evaluation of kidney research while maintaining efficient workflows that serve authors and the nephrology community effectively.
Editors guide manuscripts through evaluation, ensuring appropriate reviewer selection, timely processing, and fair decisions based on scientific merit for nephrology research.
Manuscript Assessment
Initial evaluation of submissions for scope fit, technical quality, and potential contribution to nephrology knowledge and clinical practice.
Reviewer Selection
Identify qualified experts to evaluate manuscripts in their kidney research specialty with appropriate clinical expertise.
Decision Making
Synthesize reviewer feedback into fair, well-reasoned decisions with constructive guidance for nephrology authors.
- Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts and author identities for kidney research submissions
- Recuse from decisions involving personal or professional conflicts in nephrology
- Ensure objective evaluation based on scientific merit, not author characteristics
- Report suspected misconduct following COPE procedures for medical research
Timeline expectations: Editors should complete initial assessment within one week and coordinate reviews for completion within four weeks for nephrology manuscripts.
Decisions include accept, minor revision, major revision, and reject. Revision requests should provide clear guidance on required changes with constructive feedback for improvement.
Editorial Resources
Access tools and support for managing nephrology manuscripts efficiently.
View Resources
