Complaints and Appeals
Our Dermatology Online is committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly, transparently, and in a timely manner.
This policy applies to authors, reviewers, readers, editorial board members, and other individuals who wish to raise a legitimate concern concerning the journal, its editorial processes, or a published article.
The journal distinguishes between complaints, which concern the journal’s policies, procedures, conduct, or services, and appeals, which concern an editorial decision relating to a manuscript.
1. Complaints
A complaint may concern, for example:
- editorial procedures;
- peer-review procedures;
- reviewer conduct;
- editorial conduct;
- conflicts of interest;
- publication ethics;
- suspected plagiarism or duplicate publication;
- concerns regarding research integrity;
- patient confidentiality;
- inappropriate use of artificial intelligence;
- publication errors;
- delays in editorial processing;
- fees or optional paid services;
- accessibility or availability of published content;
- other aspects of the journal’s publishing practices.
Complaints should be based on specific and verifiable information whenever possible.
2. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that the decision was substantially affected by:
- a factual error;
- a significant misunderstanding of the manuscript;
- a demonstrable error in the peer-review process;
- a serious procedural irregularity;
- a relevant conflict of interest that was not appropriately managed;
- other substantial circumstances that could reasonably have affected the decision.
An appeal should not simply repeat the arguments already presented in the manuscript or response to reviewers.
Disagreement with the scientific opinion of an editor or reviewer, by itself, does not necessarily constitute grounds for an appeal.
3. How to Submit a Complaint or Appeal
Complaints and appeals should be submitted by email to:
The subject line should clearly indicate the nature of the communication, for example:
Complaint – [manuscript/article reference]
or
Appeal – [manuscript reference]
The communication should include, where applicable:
- the name of the complainant;
- the complainant’s relationship to the journal or manuscript;
- manuscript title;
- manuscript identification number, if available;
- date of the relevant editorial decision or event;
- a clear description of the concern;
- the specific grounds for the complaint or appeal;
- relevant supporting information or documentation;
- the resolution or action being requested.
Complaints or appeals submitted without sufficient information may require clarification before they can be assessed.
4. Appeals Following Peer Review
An appeal concerning a peer-reviewed manuscript should explain specifically why the author believes that the editorial decision was affected by a factual, procedural, or significant evaluative error.
Where the appeal concerns reviewer comments, authors should identify the specific comment or issue and explain why they believe it was materially incorrect, inappropriate, or based on a misunderstanding.
An appeal should not be used simply to request another opportunity for revision after a final rejection.
5. Review of Appeals
Appeals are initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor.
Where the appeal concerns a decision made by the Editor-in-Chief, the matter may be assigned to another suitably qualified senior editor who was not involved in the original decision.
The person reviewing an appeal should be independent of the original decision where reasonably possible and should have no relevant conflict of interest.
The editor may:
- uphold the original decision;
- request clarification from the authors;
- seek an additional independent editorial or peer assessment;
- reconsider the decision;
- modify the decision where a substantial error is identified.
The outcome of an appeal is communicated to the complainant or corresponding author as appropriate.
6. Reviewer and Editorial Conflicts of Interest
If a complaint or appeal concerns a potential conflict of interest involving an editor or reviewer, the journal will take reasonable steps to ensure that the matter is assessed by a person who is not directly involved in the conflict.
Editorial independence will be maintained throughout the process.
7. Complaints Concerning Peer Review
Concerns regarding peer review may include:
- inappropriate reviewer conduct;
- breach of reviewer confidentiality;
- suspected bias;
- undisclosed conflict of interest;
- inappropriate comments;
- attempts to identify authors in a double-blind review;
- inappropriate use of confidential manuscript information.
Such concerns should be submitted to contact@odermatol.com with sufficient information to allow the editorial office to investigate the matter.
The journal may review relevant editorial records and correspondence when assessing a complaint.
8. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity
Concerns relating to publication ethics or research integrity are handled seriously.
These may include allegations or concerns regarding:
- plagiarism;
- duplicate or redundant publication;
- fabrication or falsification of data;
- inappropriate image manipulation;
- authorship disputes;
- undisclosed conflicts of interest;
- manipulation of peer review;
- inappropriate use of patient information;
- unethical research;
- inappropriate use of artificial intelligence;
- other forms of publication misconduct.
The journal may request additional information or documentation from the authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, or other relevant parties when necessary.
Where appropriate, the journal may contact the relevant institution or other responsible body.
9. Patient Confidentiality
Complaints concerning patient privacy and consent are treated with particular care.
Where a concern relates to identifiable patient information, clinical photographs, case reports, or consent for publication, the journal will take reasonable steps to protect confidential information during the assessment.
Complainants should avoid sending unnecessary patient-identifying information by email.
Where additional information is required, the editorial office will indicate what information is necessary.
10. Complaints Concerning Published Articles
Concerns about a published article may be raised after publication.
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may:
- correct the published article;
- publish a correction or other editorial notice;
- request clarification from the authors;
- investigate the concern;
- issue an Expression of Concern;
- retract the article;
- take another appropriate editorial action.
Post-publication concerns are handled in accordance with the journal’s Corrections and Retractions policy.
11. Fees and Optional Services
Complaints concerning fees, fast-track processing, or author-requested technical correction services may be submitted to:
The journal distinguishes between editorial decisions and optional paid services.
Payment for an optional service does not guarantee:
- acceptance of a manuscript;
- a favourable peer-review outcome;
- publication;
- a particular editorial decision.
Further information is provided on the journal’s Fees page.
12. Timeframe
The journal aims to acknowledge complaints and appeals promptly.
The time required to assess a complaint or appeal depends on:
- the complexity of the matter;
- the availability of relevant records;
- whether additional information is required;
- whether external or institutional input is necessary;
- whether a new editorial or peer assessment is required.
The journal will seek to provide a substantive response as soon as reasonably practicable.
Complex publication-ethics investigations may require additional time.
Where appropriate, the complainant or author may be informed that an investigation is ongoing.
13. Confidentiality
Complaints and appeals are handled confidentially to the extent reasonably possible.
Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess or resolve the matter, or where disclosure is required by applicable law or necessary for a legitimate publication-ethics investigation.
Complainants and authors should also respect the confidentiality of ongoing investigations.
14. Protection Against Retaliation
The journal will not take retaliatory action against individuals who raise a legitimate complaint or publication-ethics concern in good faith.
However, knowingly false, malicious, threatening, or abusive complaints may be addressed appropriately.
15. Final Editorial Review
Where an appeal has been assessed through the procedure described above, the resulting editorial decision is normally considered final.
Further correspondence may be considered only where the complainant or author provides substantial new information indicating a procedural or factual error that has not previously been considered.
Repeated appeals based solely on disagreement with the final editorial judgement may not be considered.
16. External Resolution and Institutional Involvement
Where a matter cannot reasonably be resolved through the journal’s internal procedures, the journal may recommend or initiate communication with an appropriate institution, ethics body, professional organisation, publisher, or other relevant authority, depending on the nature of the matter.
This may be particularly appropriate for serious allegations concerning research misconduct, authorship disputes, or ethical approval.
17. Contact
All complaints and appeals should be directed to:
Please provide sufficient information to allow the editorial team to identify and assess the matter.
Comments are closed.