Open peer review

Principles

Peer review in CONTINUUM Publishing is open: the article is public from the start, and reviewer reports are published with it. Review assesses scientific soundness, clarity of reporting and reproducibility. It does not assess novelty or expected impact.

There is no editorial board and no editor decides on an article. The outcome follows directly from the reviewers' reports.

Process

A typical request for peer review passes through these stages.

• Request: the authors choose Publishing at submission, or request review for an existing preprint.
• Screening: a short administrative check (target: 3 working days).
• Reviewer matching: reviewers with relevant expertise and no conflict of interest are invited from the reviewer registry. At least three are invited so that two can be expected to accept.
• Review: each reviewer assesses the article and publishes a report with one of three outcomes (target: 28 days).
• Response and revision: authors reply to each report and may publish a new version. Reviewers may update their assessment of any new version.
• Outcome: the article is labelled Peer reviewed when the threshold below is met.

Reviewer outcomes

Each report ends in one of three outcomes.

• Approved: the work is scientifically sound; any remaining comments are minor.
• Approved with reservations: the work has value but has weaknesses that should be addressed.
• Not approved: the work has fundamental flaws that undermine its conclusions.

When an article is labelled Peer reviewed

An article is labelled Peer reviewed when its current version has at least two Approved reports, or one Approved and two Approved with reservations. Until then it is shown as Under peer review. Articles that receive two Not approved reports are labelled accordingly; the reports remain public.

Reviewer identity and conduct

Authors choose whether reports are signed or published under anonymous reviewer labels. Reviewers declare conflicts of interest, keep unpublished data confidential until the article is public, and follow the reviewer guidelines. Reports that are abusive or off-topic are moderated.