Last updated: August 10, 2024

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they feel that the decision to reject was based on either a significant misunderstanding of a core aspect of the manuscript or concerns regarding the manuscript-handling process.

To raise an appeal about manuscript peer-review, first decision, manuscript revision, editing, and/or second decision, please contact the Science Editor Development Department Director, Jia-Ping Yan via email: j.p.yan@wjgnet.com.

To raise an appeal about manuscript production, including typesetting, and/or online releasing, please contact the Production Department Director, Xiang Li via email: x.li@wjgnet.com.

For either type of appeal, please quote your manuscript number ID and an explanation of your rationale for the appeal in your email.

To raise a complaint regarding editorial staff, peer reviewer/editorial board, publisher, publishing policies or processes, please Contact the Baishideng Office in the first instance.

To better respond to people when appeals and complaints are raised, Baishideng handle these appeals and complaints consult with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and developed our policies on handle appeals and complaints:

Appeal policy

Authors who wish to appeal for their manuscript may submit a formal appeal. Appeal requests must be made in writing to the corresponding responsible person listed above with the word “Appeal” and the manuscript number ID and an explanation of the rationale for the appeal. The appeal must be submitted by the corresponding author of the manuscript. All authors must agree to the submission of the appeal.

Corresponding authors should: (1) submit their appeal within 2 weeks of the date on which the authors receive the decision from the Editorial Office; (2) not submit their manuscript to any other journal while their appeal is being considered; (3) detail in the appeal letter why they refute the decision and provide point-by-point responses to any of the reviewers’ and/or editors’ comments, together with supporting evidence; (4) provide supporting evidence if they believe the editor or reviewer has made technical errors in their assessment of the manuscript; and (5) provide supporting evidence if they believe the editor or the reviewer may have a conflict of interest or has been biased.

Appeal requests which do not comply with the above requirements will be rejected and not considered. Appeals in which the subject matter is part of a legal dispute will not be considered, and we reserve the right to suspend or discontinue an ongoing appeal in such cases.

The time required for the consideration of an appeal may vary from the complexity of the manuscript and its conclusion, among other reasons. Anyway, any appeal will be given priority processing.

Processing steps:

Step 1: The appeal request will be considered by the Editorial Office. Where there is an allegation of a conflict of interest on the part of the Editor, the appeal will be handled by a different member of Editorial Office.

Step 2: The appeal request will be assessed in accordance with relative policies and guidelines.

Step 3: The corresponding responsible person will notify the corresponding author of the outcome of the appeal.

Step 4: If the manuscript is reconsidered, the reconsideration process may involve re-review by previous or new reviewers and/or editors, and substantive revision. Only one appeal per manuscript will be considered and the appeal decision will be final.

Complaint policy

Authors who wish to complaint regarding any editorial staff, peer reviewer/editorial board (include appeal against suspected coerced citation, or if a reviewer is suspected of appropriating author material), publisher, publishing policies or processes may submit a formal complaint to Baishideng Office in their first instance, with the word “Complaint” and an explanation of the rationale for the complaint. Any complaint will be given priority processing after its receival.

Processing steps:

Step 1: The complaint request will be considered by the Baishideng Office. To avoid any potential conflicts of interest, complaints regarding editorial staff, peer reviewer/editorial board will not be processed by the person being complained.

Step 2: The complaint request will be carefully assessed in accordance with relative rules and regulations of Baishideng.

Step 3: If the complaint is confirmed, corrective actions will be implemented immediately. These actions include re-training to editorial staff and peer reviewer/editorial board; if serious, remove/fire the editorial staff and peer reviewer/editorial board; revise and improve the relational publishing policies or processes, etc. The criteria for choosing appropriate action depends on the nature of the complaint.

Step 4: The Baishideng Office will notify the complainant of the outcome of the complaint.