Skip to main content

Peer-review policy

Peer-review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether the manuscript should be published in their journal. You can read more about the peer-review process here.

BMC Proceedings 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.

BMC Proceedings allows guest Supplement Editors, who fulfill BMC criteria, and have no conflicts of interest, to act as handling editors. Supplement Editors oversee peer review of articles, using BMC’s review systems and standards. BMC check each review and reviewer, to ensure that rigorous standards of peer review are maintained.

The Journal Editor retains overall editorial control of the Supplement content at all times and may request changes, corrections, rejections or withdrawals where articles do not meet Journal standards.

Publication of research articles by BMC Proceedings is dependent primarily on their scientific validity and coherence as judged by our external expert editors and peer reviewers. We do not make editorial decisions on the basis of the interest of a study or its likely impact. Studies must be scientifically valid; for research articles this includes a scientifically sound research question, the use of suitable methods and analysis, and following community-agreed standards relevant to the research field.

Any queries regarding reviews for BMC Proceedings can be directed to BMC by email:

Annual Journal Metrics

  • 2022 Citation Impact
    0.914 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper)
    0.506 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

    2023 Usage 
    196 Altmetric mentions