Skip Nav Destination
All Portland Press journals follow a single-anonymous peer review model, in which reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. We expect reviewers to be objective and impartial and to use their expertise to offer a constructive analysis of the paper. We encourage efforts to support early career researchers and are happy for reviewers to include students in their review process as a development/training opportunity for them. Reviewers should inform the Editorial Office if they choose to do this.
Portland Press is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and therefore refers to their ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. When invited, reviewers must carefully consider and declare potential conflicts of interest to the Editorial Office at the earliest opportunity. The Editorial Office will then advise whether this conflict of interest prevents their participation in the review process.
For research papers, data deposition in a public repository is mandatory for certain datasets and strongly encouraged for others. Please see our Data Policy for more information. The Data Availability Statement within research papers should contain access details for these datasets. Reviewers may request that the Editorial Office ask the authors for further supporting data to aid peer review.
Once peer review is complete, the handling Editor will carefully evaluate comments and recommendations of reviewers before making a decision on the paper. The handling Editor may, on occasion, make minor editorial changes to comments from reviewers within the decision letter to ensure clarity and anonymity.
Portland Press and The Biochemical Society value and recognise the vital work of our community of reviewers. We have partnered with Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service to enable reviewer recognition seamlessly during your review submission.
Information for Reviewers
All Portland Press journals follow a single-anonymous peer review model, in which reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. We expect reviewers to be objective and impartial and to use their expertise to offer a constructive analysis of the paper. We encourage efforts to support early career researchers and are happy for reviewers to include students in their review process as a development/training opportunity for them. Reviewers should inform the Editorial Office if they choose to do this.Portland Press is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and therefore refers to their ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. When invited, reviewers must carefully consider and declare potential conflicts of interest to the Editorial Office at the earliest opportunity. The Editorial Office will then advise whether this conflict of interest prevents their participation in the review process.
For research papers, data deposition in a public repository is mandatory for certain datasets and strongly encouraged for others. Please see our Data Policy for more information. The Data Availability Statement within research papers should contain access details for these datasets. Reviewers may request that the Editorial Office ask the authors for further supporting data to aid peer review.
Once peer review is complete, the handling Editor will carefully evaluate comments and recommendations of reviewers before making a decision on the paper. The handling Editor may, on occasion, make minor editorial changes to comments from reviewers within the decision letter to ensure clarity and anonymity.
Portland Press and The Biochemical Society value and recognise the vital work of our community of reviewers. We have partnered with Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service to enable reviewer recognition seamlessly during your review submission.
