Neurovascular Imaging operates a double-blind peer-review system, where the reviewers do not know the names or affiliations of the authors and the reviewer reports provided to the authors are anonymous.
The benefit of double-blind peer review is that it allows reviewers to judge the manuscript based on content alone, and they are not unconsciously biased by knowledge of who the authors are.
Manuscripts submitted to Neurovascular Imaging will be evaluated initially by the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor, and appropriate manuscripts are then sent for peer review to recognized experts in the field, who may be members of the Editorial Board or external peer reviewers. The reports of at least two reviewers will be considered when deciding on acceptance or rejection of a manuscript; a further reviewer may be invited in cases where these reviewers disagree. Final decisions rest with the Handling Editor or Editor-in-Chief, who aim to provide an initial decision within six weeks. In cases where authors challenge an Editor's negative decision with well-founded arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one or two additional reviewers at the discretion of the Handling Editor, and a final decision will be made upon their recommendations.