Peer Review

Reviewers are asked to complete reviews on time, keep the submission contents confidential, and avoid using information in their own work.

The Journal Review Process is detailed in Author Instructions. With few exceptions, articles undergo single-anonymous peer review—that is, reviewers can see the authors and their affiliations, but the names of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

Individuals are identified as potential peer reviewers based on their areas of expertise and on key terms selected by authors at submission. Individuals who do not have sufficient knowledge in the field to complete a review should decline the invitation.

On submission, authors may also suggest the names of potential reviewers. In most cases, they should avoid recommending individuals who may have conflicts of interest, such as colleagues at the same institution and other close collaborators. The editors can choose not to invite suggested reviewers.

All reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest for each manuscript they are invited to review. If conflicts are revealed, new reviewers are invited. Submissions from The Journal editors and Editorial Board members are handled by guest editors who are not affiliated with The Texas Heart Institute.

Reviewers complete their evaluations in Editorial Manager. They are asked to comment objectively on whether the content contributes to the literature and how well the paper's main points are communicated. For most article types, they evaluate the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment, and for Original Research articles, they consider the study design and the robustness of results.

Reviewer comments are included in decision letters, and they are edited by The Journal staff as needed for clarity and tone.