Editorial Peer Review Policy

The European Journal of Oncology is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and scientific rigor in its publishing process. The peer review process is central to ensuring the quality, validity, and relevance of the research published by the journal.

1. Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the European Journal of Oncology undergo a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential. This ensures unbiased evaluation based solely on merit and quality.

Upon submission, each manuscript is initially assessed by the editorial team to confirm its relevance to the journal’s scope and compliance with quality standards. Suitable manuscripts are forwarded to at least two independent experts for review.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on:

  • Originality and novelty of the research
  • Scientific rigor and methodological quality
  • Clarity, organization, and coherence of presentation
  • Relevance and contribution to oncology research
  • Ethical standards (human/animal studies, informed consent, data integrity)
  • Accuracy and appropriateness of references

2. Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are appointed based on expertise, impartiality, and professional qualifications. The editorial team ensures reviewers are recognized experts capable of providing constructive and unbiased feedback to improve the work.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must provide a fair, thorough, and timely evaluation of the manuscript. Their role is to help authors improve their research quality and clarity.

  • Identify concerns regarding data validity, ethics, or methodology
  • Disclose conflicts of interest before accepting assignments
  • Maintain strict confidentiality and avoid misuse of manuscript content

4. Editorial Decision and Feedback

Following peer review, the editorial team makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: Accepted without or with minor revisions.
  • Minor Revisions: Small changes required before acceptance.
  • Major Revisions: Substantial improvements required before reconsideration.
  • Reject: Manuscript not suitable for publication.

Authors receive reviewer/editor feedback with clear guidance for revisions where applicable.

5. Ethical Guidelines

The European Journal of Oncology follows COPE principles. Unethical practices such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation result in rejection. In severe cases, authors may be banned from future submissions.

The peer review process is strictly confidential, impartial, and fair. All participants are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards.

6. Transparency and Author Appeals

Authors may contest editorial decisions by submitting a formal appeal to the editorial board. Appeals are carefully reviewed and may involve additional reviews or re-evaluation. The board’s decision is final.

7. Review Timeliness

The journal aims to complete peer review within 3–5 weeks. Reviewers are generally expected to provide feedback within 2 weeks, depending on the manuscript’s complexity.

By adhering to this structured peer review policy, the European Journal of Oncology ensures that published research meets the highest academic standards and contributes meaningfully to the field of oncology.