Skip to content


Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice

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.

Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice 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 benefit 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 are assigned to one of the Editors-in-Chief and after an initial screening for general suitability, manuscripts are reviewed by two or more experts in the field. Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent and whether the manuscript should be accepted, rejected or revised. Final decisions rest with the Editors-in-Chief.

Edited by Robert L Coleman, Thomas J Herzog and Bradley J Monk, Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice is supported by an expert Editorial Board.

2016 Journal Metrics

  • Speed
    27 days from submission to first decision
    17 days from acceptance to publication

    1194.0 Usage Factor

    Social Media Impact
    10 Mentions