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.
Molecular Brain 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 benefits 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.
We feel that high-quality data should be published promptly, without unnecessary delay. In our experience, reviewers sometimes request additional time-consuming experiments, although the data are already valid and ready for publication. If a manuscript lacks necessary experiments or controls in order to support its conclusions, it will be returned to the authors so they are able to take the time they need to re-visit their data outside of Molecular Brain’s submission system.