Guidelines for Reviewers
Annals of Urologic Oncology (AUO) follows a rigorous peer review process to evaluate submitted manuscripts. The journal uses a single-blind peer review process.
External reviewers may be chosen from author’s suggestions; however, additional reviewers may be appointed as needed. Designated Editorial Board Members are responsible for selecting at least two qualified reviewers for each manuscript, ensuring they have relevant expertise.
A. Is the manuscript comprehensive enough for people to understand? If not, how can it be improved?
B. Does the manuscript provide sufficient evidence to support its claims?
C. Have the authors properly acknowledged and referenced previous findings?
D. Are the methods described in sufficient detail to allow reproducibility?
E. Does the manuscript include detailed protocols as supplementary information? If not, should it?
Reviewers are expected to submit their reports in a timely manner (within two weeks), as a timely review contribute to the efficient publication of the manuscript, benefiting both the authors and the scientific community.
Reviewers should submit their reports on the manuscript to the designated Editorial Board Member along with their recommendations, choosing one of the following actions:
1) Accept Submission
2) Major/Minor Revisions Required
3) Decline Submission
Special Issues are collections of papers on topics of particular interest, organized and led by Guest Editors who are experts in the field. All submissions for Special Issues follow the same peer review process as regular articles. All manuscripts should be submitted through the journal's online submission system, and Guest Editors and invited authors must adhere strictly to the Journal’s Editorial Policies.