Appeals process | AmViMed Publishers
Authors may appeal editorial decisions where they believe a significant procedural problem, factual misunderstanding, or review-quality issue materially affected the outcome. When an appeal is appropriate: Appeals should focus on substantive concerns such as reviewer error, overlooked evidence, or process irregularitie
Authors may appeal editorial decisions where they believe a significant procedural problem, factual misunderstanding, or review-quality issue materially affected the outcome.
When an appeal is appropriate
Appeals should focus on substantive concerns such as reviewer error, overlooked evidence, or process irregularities rather than simple disagreement with an unfavorable decision. Appeals are strongest when they respond directly to the decision rationale. New data or major new analyses may be better suited to a fresh submission than an appeal.
What to include
Provide the manuscript ID, decision date, a concise explanation of the concern, and specific responses to the issues being challenged. Unsupported general objections are unlikely to change the editorial outcome. Where possible, cite exact reviewer comments or decision statements that need reconsideration.
Editorial handling of appeals
Appeals may be reviewed by a senior editor, editorial board member, or an alternative decision-maker not involved in the original determination. The appeal outcome may uphold, revise, or reopen the decision depending on the evidence presented. Appeals do not guarantee re-review or reversal.