Peer Review Process
All submissions to Kidneys undergo a double-blind peer review process in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.
1. Initial Editorial Screening
Each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Editor to ensure:
-
relevance to the journal’s scope
-
originality
-
compliance with ethical standards
-
quality of writing
-
completeness of submission
Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be returned without external review.
2. External Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass initial screening are sent to a minimum of two independent external reviewers who are experts in the relevant field.
Reviewers assess:
-
scientific and methodological quality
-
originality and contribution to the field
-
clarity and coherence of presentation
-
accuracy of data and validity of analysis
-
ethical compliance
-
relevance to nephrology, kidney diseases, and related disciplines
3. Review Timeframe
The standard review timeframe is 2–4 weeks.
Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review.
4. Confidentiality
All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents.
Reviewers must not:
-
share, copy, or distribute the manuscript
-
use data or ideas obtained through peer review
-
discuss the content with others
5. Reviewer Independence & Conflict of Interest
Reviewers are required to disclose any conflict of interest.
Manuscripts authored by Editorial Board members or the Editor-in-Chief are handled by an independent Guest Editor or Associate Editor who is not affiliated with the authors.
6. Editorial Decision
The final publication decision (accept, revise, reject) is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated Associate Editor, taking into account reviewer recommendations and journal policies.
Possible decisions:
-
Accept
-
Minor revision
-
Major revision
-
Reject
7. Revision Process
If revisions are required:
-
authors receive reviewer comments
-
authors must submit a revised manuscript within 10 days (or a negotiated timeline)
-
revisions may be re-reviewed by the original reviewers
8. Appeals
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a justified explanation.
Appeals are reviewed by an independent editor.
ISSN 2307-1257
ISSN 2307-1265
















