Editorial quality
Editorial board and peer-review checks
A journal’s credibility depends heavily on real editors doing real editorial work. Names on a website are not enough; they should be verifiable and relevant to the journal’s subject area.
Maintained by the Beallslists.com editorial review team · Last reviewed: June 19, 2026
Check the editorial board like evidence
Look for full names, institutional affiliations, fields of expertise, and links to public profiles. A strong board usually has specialists whose work matches the journal scope. A weak or suspicious board may have missing affiliations, unrelated disciplines, copied biographies, dead links, or famous names with no proof of involvement.
- Editor names can be matched to university, hospital, ORCID, society, or laboratory pages.
- Editors have expertise related to the journal’s scope.
- The journal explains who makes acceptance decisions.
- Peer review type, reviewer selection, conflicts of interest, and appeals are described.
- Recent article timelines are plausible for the stated review process.
Review timeline warning signs
Be cautious when a research article is accepted within 24 to 72 hours, especially if the journal claims external peer review. Fast editorial screening is possible; meaningful peer review usually requires time for reviewer selection, review, revision, and final editorial decision.
What real peer review should leave behind
Peer review is not always visible, but the journal should describe its process clearly. It should explain how reviewers are chosen, how conflicts are managed, what happens after revision, and how complaints or appeals are handled. The published articles should also show basic editorial care: coherent formatting, relevant references, clear disclosures, and corrected metadata.
A small test authors can do
Pick one article recently published by the journal and compare the submission, revision, acceptance, and publication dates if shown. If complex clinical, laboratory, or statistical work was submitted and accepted almost immediately, ask how the review was performed and whether reviewer comments are available to the author.
Useful external references
Use these public resources alongside your institution’s own publication policy and the current evidence for the specific journal or publisher you are checking.