The Clinical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CJOG) uses a robust, ethical, and transparent peer-review process designed to evaluate scientific rigor, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and clinical relevance. The following operational manual describes the complete peer-review process in detail, from manuscript submission to final acceptance. This process adheres to COPE Core Practices, ICMJE recommendations, and global medical publishing standards.

1. Overview of CJOG’s Peer Review Model

CJOG uses a structured double-blind peer review system to eliminate bias. In this model:

Authors do not know the identities of reviewers
Reviewers do not know the identities of authors

1.1 Manuscript Types Covered

CJOG applies full peer review to:

Original Research Articles
Case Reports
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Short Communications
Clinical Studies

Editorials, letters, and invited commentaries undergo editorial review only.

2. Peer Review Workflow (Full Cycle)

Below is a complete workflow diagram (text-based) outlining the steps from submission to acceptance.

  MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION
         │
         ▼
  EDITORIAL SCREENING
    - Scope Check
    - Ethics Check
    - Similarity Check
         │
         ▼
  ASSOCIATE EDITOR ASSIGNMENT
         │
         ▼
  REVIEWER SELECTION (2–3 reviewers)
         │
         ▼
  PEER REVIEW (14 days)
         │
         ▼
  EDITOR EVALUATION OF REVIEWS
         │
         ▼
  EDITOR DECISION
  (Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject)
         │
         ▼
  AUTHOR REVISION (7–20 days)
         │
         ▼
  RE-REVIEW (if major revision)
         │
         ▼
  FINAL DECISION
         │
         ▼
  ACCEPTANCE & PRODUCTION

3. Stage-by-Stage Breakdown of the Peer Review Process

3.1 Stage 1 — Manuscript Submission

Authors upload their manuscript and required files (cover letter, ethics statements, figures) via the OJS submission portal. The system generates an automated acknowledgment.

3.2 Stage 2 — Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or assigned Associate Editor evaluates:

Scope alignment
Adherence to author guidelines
Ethics compliance (IRB approval, consent)
Structure and completeness of the manuscript
Similarity report for plagiarism

3.3 Initial Editorial Decision Types

Send for peer review (proceed)
Request technical corrections
Desk reject (if out of scope or low quality)

Desk rejection criteria include: extreme similarity matches, absence of ethical approval, non-medical scope, or severely flawed methodology.

3.4 Stage 3 — Reviewer Selection

Editors select at least two independent reviewers based on:

Expertise in obstetrics and gynecology
Previous reviewer performance
Geographical and gender diversity
No conflicts of interest

Tip: CJOG encourages inclusion of early-career researchers as co-reviewers under supervision.

3.5 Reviewer Invitation Process

Reviewers receive:

Manuscript title and abstract
Estimated time commitment
Confidentiality expectations
Conflict-of-interest declaration requirements

4. Stage 4 — Peer Review Execution

4.1 Review Deadlines

Standard review: 14 days
Revisions review: 7 days
Extensions are permitted but discouraged

4.2 Reviewer Responsibilities During Review

Reviewers must:

Assess ethical compliance
Evaluate clarity, structure, and originality
Assess statistical soundness
Check for image integrity
Identify missing methodological details
Provide respectful, constructive feedback

4.3 Confidentiality Rules

Reviewers must not:

Share manuscripts with third parties
Use information for personal research
Store files long-term

4.4 Reviewer Recommendation Types

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject
Resubmit for New Review

5. Stage 5 — Editorial Decision

Editors carefully evaluate reviewer reports and manuscript quality to issue a decision.

5.1 Criteria for Editorial Evaluation

Area	Editorial Focus
Scientific Merit	Novelty, rigor, contribution to field
Ethics	IRB approval, consent, patient privacy
Methodology	Reproducibility, statistical validity
Clinical Relevance	Usefulness for Ob/Gyn practice
Clarity	Organization, flow, readability

5.2 Editor Decision Categories

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject
Request Additional Review

5.3 Communicating Decisions to Authors

Editors must provide clear, constructive, respectful, and unbiased communication.

6. Stage 6 — Revision Process

Authors receive reviewer feedback and make revisions accordingly.

6.1 Editorial Expectations for Revisions

Authors must:

Respond to each reviewer comment
Provide a detailed response matrix
Highlight changes in the revised manuscript
Address ethical concerns

6.2 Revision Timelines

Major revision: 14–20 days
Minor revision: 7–14 days

6.3 Re-Review

Major revisions typically require:

New reviewer assessment
Additional evaluation from original reviewers

7. Stage 7 — Final Decision and Acceptance

Once revisions satisfy reviewer and editorial requirements:

The Editor-in-Chief issues final acceptance
The manuscript enters production
Copyediting and typesetting begin
DOI is assigned upon publication

8. Ethics and Integrity in Peer Review

CJOG maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy for unethical review practices.

8.1 Reviewer Misconduct

Examples include:

Using unpublished data
Biased or discriminatory comments
Plagiarism within review reports
Intentionally delaying reviews

8.2 Editorial Misconduct

Includes:

Manipulating reviewer selection
Ignoring conflicts of interest
Coercive citation practices
Undue influence on decision outcomes

9. Handling Ethical Concerns During Peer Review

9.1 Plagiarism

Steps:

Review similarity report
Examine suspicious sections
Request author clarification
Reject if plagiarism is confirmed

9.2 Data Manipulation

Editors must:

Seek statistical review when needed
Request raw data
Evaluate inconsistencies

9.3 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must declare conflicts before proceeding.

10. Confidentiality Rules for Editors and Reviewers

CJOG strictly enforces confidentiality to ensure fair and unbiased peer review.

Manuscripts may not be shared externally
Reviewers must delete files after review
Editor identities remain anonymous in communication
Internal discussions are confidential

11. Peer Review Timeframes and Quality Benchmarks

Task	Expected Completion Time
Initial screening	48–72 hours
Reviewer assignment	2–5 days
Standard review	14 days
Revision review	7 days
Final decision	3–5 days after review

12. Post-Publication Review and Corrections

Peer review does not end at publication. Editors may:

Issue corrections
Publish retractions (rare, but necessary)
Release editorial notes or expressions of concern
Respond to reader feedback

Conclusion

CJOG’s peer-review process is designed to maintain scientific excellence, ethical integrity, transparency, and fairness. The structured workflow, rigorous reviewer evaluation, and ethical oversight ensure that published research contributes meaningfully to the fields of obstetrics and gynecology. By adhering to this comprehensive process, CJOG upholds its commitment to quality and credibility.