Reviewer Selection Criteria

The journal aims to communicate a first-round decision within 8 weeks of submission, although the actual duration depends on the availability of suitable reviewers and the complexity of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected from the journal's annually updated reviewers' database. Selection takes account of:

  • Academic and professional qualifications — typically a doctoral degree or equivalent and an active research or clinical record in the relevant subspeciality;
  • Subject expertise — demonstrated by recent peer-reviewed publications relevant to the manuscript's topic;
  • Professional and ethical standing — no record of misconduct and an accepted understanding of the COPE standards;
  • Geographic and institutional diversity — at least 30% of reviewers are based outside Libya, and the panel is balanced for gender and career stage;
  • Independence — no recent collaboration with the authors, no current institutional affiliation in common, and no other conflict of interest.
  • Active research or clinical record in the relevant subspeciality.
  • Recent peer-reviewed publications relevant to the manuscript's topic.
  • No record of misconduct and demonstrated familiarity with COPE standards.

Annual Reconstitution

  • The Reviewer Panel is reviewed and updated annually by the Editorial Board.
  • New reviewers are nominated by Board members, by existing reviewers, or by self-nomination through the journal website.
  • Each prospective reviewer completes a Conflict of Interest declaration and the Reviewer Profile Form before being added to the Panel.