Peer Review Process

At NeuroImage, every manuscript is evaluated through a rigorous, fair, and confidential peer review process to support the publication of high-quality scientific research in neuroscience and related disciplines.

Our editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, originality, methodological quality, ethical standards, and relevance to the scope of the Journal. The peer review process is designed to provide constructive feedback to authors while maintaining high standards of academic integrity and editorial independence.

Manuscript Submission and Initial Screening

Authors submit their manuscripts through the Journal's online submission system. Upon receipt, the Editorial Office conducts an initial technical assessment to verify that:

• All required submission files have been provided.
• Author information and manuscript metadata are complete.
• The manuscript complies with the Journal's submission guidelines.
• Ethical approvals and required declarations have been included where applicable.
• The manuscript falls within the aims and scope of the Journal.

At this stage, manuscripts may be returned to the authors for technical corrections before editorial evaluation.

Editorial Assessment

Following the initial screening, the manuscript is assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate Associate Editor with expertise in the relevant subject area. The assigned editor evaluates the manuscript for:

• Scientific originality.
• Relevance to neuroscience and related disciplines.
• Methodological quality.
• Ethical compliance.
• Overall suitability for publication.

Manuscripts that do not meet the Journal's standards or fall outside its scope may be declined without external peer review, which is known as editorial rejection.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts considered suitable for publication are sent to independent experts for peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, research experience, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest.

Depending on the manuscript's subject, reviewers may evaluate:

• Originality and significance of the research.
• Scientific validity and methodology.
• Accuracy and transparency of data analysis.
• Interpretation of results.
• Quality of presentation.
• Compliance with ethical standards.
• Overall contribution to neuroscience, neurology, neuroimaging, or related fields.

Reviewers provide constructive comments for both the authors and the editors, together with a recommendation regarding publication.

Editorial Decisions

After considering the reviewers' reports, the handling editor will make one of the following decisions:

Accept

The manuscript is accepted for publication without further substantive scientific revision.

Minor Revision

The manuscript requires limited revisions before it can be accepted. Authors should address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised version within the requested timeframe.

Major Revision

The manuscript requires substantial revisions before further consideration. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers.

Reject

The manuscript is not considered suitable for publication due to scientific, methodological, ethical, or editorial reasons.

Reviewer comments, where available, are normally provided to assist the authors. The Editor-in-Chief's decision on all manuscripts is final.

Revision Process

Authors invited to revise their manuscripts should:

• Respond individually to each reviewer comment.
• Clearly identify all revisions made.
• Provide a detailed response letter explaining how reviewer comments have been addressed.
• Ensure that the revised manuscript remains consistent with the underlying research data and ethical requirements.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified period may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from consideration.

Final Acceptance

Once the editor is satisfied that all scientific and editorial concerns have been adequately addressed, the manuscript is formally accepted. Accepted manuscripts proceed to:

• Copyediting.
• Typesetting.
• Proofreading.
• Author proof approval.
• Final publication.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to NeuroImage are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest before participating in the review of a manuscript. Where a conflict exists, an alternative editor or reviewer will be assigned.

Authors are also expected to disclose relevant financial, professional, or personal relationships that could influence the research or its interpretation.

Ethical Standards

The Journal expects authors, reviewers, and editors to adhere to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics.

Any concerns regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, image manipulation, authorship disputes, or other forms of research misconduct will be investigated in accordance with accepted editorial and ethical guidelines.

Research involving human participants, animals, patient data, or identifiable medical images must meet applicable ethical and regulatory requirements.

Article Types

The peer review process may vary depending on the type of submission.

• Research Articles: Original neuroscience, neurology, neuroimaging, and related research articles undergo full external peer review.
• Review Articles: Narrative reviews and systematic reviews are evaluated through independent peer review.
• Case Reports and Case Series: Case reports and case series are reviewed for scientific relevance, educational value, clinical importance, and ethical compliance.
• Methodological and Technical Articles: Contributions describing new techniques, analytical methods, or technological advances are evaluated for scientific validity, originality, and reproducibility.
• Editorials: Editorials are generally commissioned by the Editorial Board or invited experts and may be reviewed at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.
• Letters to the Editor: Letters are assessed by the editorial team and, where appropriate, may also be reviewed by independent experts or referred to the authors of the original article for response.
• Corrections and Retractions: Errata, corrigenda, retractions, editorial expressions of concern, and similar notices are managed by the Editorial Office in accordance with the Journal's publication ethics policies and do not ordinarily undergo external peer review.

Our Commitment

NeuroImage is committed to providing:

• Fair and impartial editorial decisions.
• Independent and confidential peer review.
• Constructive feedback for authors.
• Transparent editorial procedures.
• Ethical and responsible scholarly publishing.
• Timely handling of manuscripts while maintaining high scientific standards.