Peer Review

All submitted manuscripts undergo a thorough closed double-blind peer review process. The authors and the reviewers will be treated anonymously. This usually involves review by two independent peer reviewers. Individual journals may differ in their peer review processes. For an individual journal’s peer review policy, please see the journal website.

Peer review policy

All submissions to ImmunoAnalysis are assessed by Editor-in-Chief, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Where Editor-in-Chief is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific submission, another member of the editorial board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by appropriate independent experts. Editor-in-Chief and/or Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected.

Policies application to editorial board members

Editorial Board Members in ImmunoAnalysis are required to declare any interests that might influence, or be perceived to influence, their editorial activities. In particular, they should exclude themselves from handling manuscripts in cases where there is a conflict of interest, financial or otherwise. This may include – but is not limited to – having previously published with one or more of the authors, and sharing the same institution as one or more of the authors. Editorial Board Members are welcome to submit papers to the journal. These submissions are not given any priority over other manuscripts, and Editorial Board Member status has no bearing on editorial consideration. When an Editorial Board Member is an author on a submission, they will have no involvement in the editorial review of the manuscript, no access to confidential information on the editorial process, and no input into the decision to publish the article.

Peer review and acceptance for in-house submissions

In-house submissions (papers authored by Editors or Editorial Board Members of the title) will be sent to Editorial Board Members unaffiliated with the author or institution and monitored carefully to ensure there is no peer review bias. After receipt of a manuscript by the Editor-in-Chief, it may be sent to an appropriate number of reviewers (usually two, depending on the type of manuscript). Editor-in-Chief may ask for suggested reviewer names from an Editorial Board Member. Comments from reviewers are examined by the Editor-in-Chief and/or Editors, who make the final decisions. Rebuttals should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief at the email address provided on the journals’ website.


Based upon scientific achievements and publication trajectory, ImmunoAnalysis invites scientists from different disciplines and international institutions to serve as Editors. ImmunoAnalysis the applications and selects the best candidate according to the COPE Guidelines, including issues related to competing interests. A regular auditing process is applied to ensure upon best practice, based on the COPE Guidelines. The editors evaluate the articles and solicit peer reviewers. The peer reviewers’ comments are evaluated by the Editors, who have final decision on publication of content in the journal.

Peer reviewers

Authors may suggest potential reviewers if they wish; however, decision to consider these reviewers is at the editor's discretion. Authors should not suggest recent collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves. Authors who wish to suggest peer reviewers can do so in the cover letter and should provide institutional email addresses where possible or information which will help the Editor to verify and identity the potential introduced reviewer (e.g., an ORCID or Scopus ID).
Authors may request exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the editor may choose to invite excluded peer reviewers.
Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in rejection of the manuscript and may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy.