International Journal of Vasculitis

Read the manuscript against Aims and Scope first. A manuscript outside the journal’s subject is returned quickly, with the reason stated, so the authors lose no time.

All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and minimum requirements proceed to independent peer review.

Confirm that ethical approval, consent, trial registration, competing interests, funding and data availability are stated where the study design requires them.

Missing declarations are resolved before review begins, not afterwards.

Choose reviewers who can judge the specific question, not only the general subject. Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.

Avoid reviewers with a recent collaboration, a shared institution or a competing interest in the work, and record why a reviewer was chosen where that is not obvious.

Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.

When double-blind review is requested, editors must ensure that author-identifying information is not shared with reviewers.

Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.

A decision letter should tell the authors what the evidence supports and what it does not, in terms they can act on. Where reviewers disagree, the editor explains the reasoning rather than counting votes.

Concerns about integrity, authorship, consent or overlap go to the editorial office rather than being settled in correspondence with the authors.

The journal follows recognized publication-ethics guidance in investigating them.

Decisions, reviewer identities and correspondence stay with the manuscript record. Manuscripts and reviews are confidential and are not discussed outside the editorial process.