International Journal of Vasculitis

Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.

An author who wants double-blind review asks for it at submission.

All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and minimum requirements proceed to independent peer review.

Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.

Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.

Those decisions remain independent of fees, services, memberships, and roles.

Manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors under the default model, and reviewers are asked not to discuss or use the manuscript outside the review.

After submitting the review, reviewers should securely delete downloaded manuscript files and must not retain or use unpublished material.

An author may ask the editorial office to reconsider a decision, giving the scientific grounds. Appeals are handled by an editor who was not responsible for the original decision.

Studies involving human participants or animals must carry the approvals their design requires, with the approving body named in the manuscript.

Identifiable patient information, including images and detailed case descriptions, requires written consent to publish.

Interventional clinical trials must be registered in an accepted public trial registry at or before the first participant provides consent for enrollment. The registry name, registration number, and registration date must be reported in the manuscript.

Every empirical research manuscript must include a data-availability statement.

Where data cannot be shared, the manuscript states why and on what terms access may be sought.

Authorship is limited to those who contributed substantially to the work and approved the final manuscript. Everyone who contributed but does not meet that standard is acknowledged.

Changes to authorship after submission require the written agreement of all authors.

Authors, reviewers and editors disclose financial and non-financial interests that a reader could reasonably consider relevant. Editors recuse themselves from their own submissions.

Manuscripts are screened for overlap with the published literature. A similarity report is read by an editor in context rather than applied as an automatic threshold.

Submission to more than one journal at a time is not compatible with review here.

Authors disclose any use of generative AI in preparing a manuscript. AI tools cannot be listed as authors, because authorship carries accountability that a tool cannot hold.

Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured.

Posting a preprint is compatible with submission. Authors disclose the preprint and its identifier at submission.

Errors that affect the record are corrected by a linked notice, so that the original article and its correction are read together.

Retraction is used where findings are unreliable or where the work breaches research or publication ethics. The notice states the reason and who requested it.

Retracted articles remain available and are labeled as retracted in every listing.

Concerns about a published article should be sent to the editorial office with the evidence they rest on. The journal follows recognized publication-ethics guidance in investigating them.

Articles published in this journal to date carry a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which lets others reuse the work with attribution.