Cardiovascular Diabetology operates a single-blind peer-review system, where the reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of the authors, but the reviewer reports provided to authors are anonymous.
The benefit of single-blind peer review is that it is the traditional model of peer review that many reviewers are comfortable with, and it facilitates a dispassionate critique of a manuscript.
Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two or more experts who will be asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, whether it duplicates already published work, and whether or not the manuscript is sufficiently clear for publication. The Editors will reach a decision based on these reports and, where necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board.
Peer review in Cardiovascular Diabetology is designed to ensure that the research published is 'good science'. The journal considers manuscripts spanning a wide range of scientific interests, as long as the results and conclusions are scientifically justified and not misleading. In deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript, a reviewer asks him/herself whether the scientific community is better served by publishing or not publishing the manuscript. The suitability of a research article for publication in the journal is assessed by peer reviewers, who base their decision primarily on the article's validity and coherence but who also consider its comprehensibility and level of interest to the reader.
2017 Journal Metrics
28 days to first decision for reviewed manuscripts only
32 days to first decision for all manuscripts
71 days from submission to acceptance
13 days from acceptance to publication
706 Altmetric Mentions