Peer Review Policy
Rigorous, fair, and timely evaluation of every submission
Double-Blind Peer Review
All manuscripts submitted to OSCRSJ undergo double-blind peer review. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities during the review process. This ensures that every submission is evaluated solely on its scientific merit, clinical significance, and adherence to reporting standards — regardless of the author's institution, training level, or reputation.
Review Process
Initial Editorial Screening
1–7 daysThe Editor-in-Chief screens submissions for scope, completeness, and basic quality. Manuscripts that do not meet minimum criteria are returned within 7 days with feedback.
Reviewer Assignment
1–3 daysSuitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant orthopedic subspecialty.
Peer Review
14–21 daysReviewers evaluate the manuscript for clinical significance, novelty, methodology, ethical compliance, and clarity of presentation. Structured review forms are used.
Editorial Decision
1–3 daysBased on reviewer recommendations, the editor issues one of four decisions: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject.
Revision & Resubmission
14 daysAuthors are given clear, constructive feedback and a deadline for revision. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review.
Final Decision & Publication
3–7 daysAccepted manuscripts receive copyediting, DOI assignment, and are published online.
Target: first decision within 30 days of submission.
Reviewer Criteria
Clinical Significance
Does the case contribute meaningful knowledge to orthopedic practice or education?
Novelty
Does the case present an unusual diagnosis, rare complication, or novel treatment approach?
Methodology
Is the case reported with sufficient detail, appropriate follow-up, and sound clinical reasoning?
Ethical Compliance
Does the manuscript include appropriate patient consent and IRB/ethics documentation?
Reporting Quality
Does the manuscript follow CARE guidelines and OSCRSJ formatting standards?
Clarity
Is the manuscript well-written, logically structured, and free of ambiguity?
Appeals
Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly rejected may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief at editor@oscrsj.com. Appeals must include a detailed response to each reviewer comment and a rationale for reconsideration. The editorial team will evaluate the appeal and may seek additional review. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.