All full-length manuscripts submitted to regular issues of Transactions on Additive Manufacturing Meets Medicine (Trans. AMMM) undergo an initial editorial assessment followed by a rigorous single-blind peer-review process. The editorial process is designed to ensure high standards of scientific quality, methodological rigor, transparency, research integrity, and ethical compliance.
Criteria for Publication
Manuscripts considered for publication in Trans. AMMM are evaluated according to the following core criteria:
1. Scientific Validity
The research must be scientifically sound and conducted in accordance with recognized standards of the respective discipline. Study design, methodology, data analysis, and interpretation must be appropriate to the research question and adequately supported by the presented evidence.
2. Technical Quality and Transparency
Methods and procedures must be appropriately applied and described with sufficient clarity and detail to allow their scientific assessment and, where applicable, reproduction. Results must be reported accurately, transparently, and without selective presentation.
3. Scholarly Relevance
The manuscript should make a meaningful contribution to the field of additive manufacturing in medicine. Contributions may include original research, methodological or technological advances, validation and replication studies, translational or clinical investigations, as well as well-designed studies reporting negative or null results.
4. Reproducibility and Research Data
Authors are strongly encouraged to make relevant data, code, protocols, design files, and other supplementary materials available whenever legally, ethically, and technically possible. Such materials should be provided in a manner that facilitates independent verification, reproducibility, and reuse.
5. Ethical and Responsible Research Conduct
Research involving human participants, human-derived materials, animals, or other activities requiring ethical or regulatory oversight must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international standards.
Where applicable, manuscripts must include appropriate statements regarding ethical approval and informed consent. Authors must also provide a complete and transparent declaration of potential conflicts of interest and disclose relevant funding sources.
Editorial and Peer-Review Process
Following submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to assess its suitability for Trans. AMMM, including its alignment with the journal’s Aims & Scope, overall scientific quality, completeness, and compliance with formal and ethical requirements.
Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are assigned to a handling editor with appropriate subject-matter expertise and proceed to peer review.
Peer review is conducted by at least two independent experts selected on the basis of their scientific expertise, impartiality, and ability to provide constructive and evidence-based assessment. Trans. AMMM operates a single-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors.
Editorial decisions are based on the reviewers’ assessments, the handling editor’s evaluation of the manuscript, and compliance with the journal’s scientific, ethical, and publication standards. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the editorial decision.
The handling editor is responsible for the final editorial decision on a manuscript and may request minor or major revisions, accept the manuscript for publication, or reject the submission.
Research Integrity and Editorial Oversight
Trans. AMMM is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and responsible scientific publishing. Where submissions raise significant ethical questions, potential dual-use concerns, conflicts of interest, or broader societal implications, the Editors-in-Chief may initiate additional editorial review.
This may include consultation with independent experts or ethics advisors, additional or specialized peer review, requests for further documentation or clarification, or enhanced editorial oversight. In cases where concerns cannot be adequately resolved, consideration of the manuscript may be suspended or the submission may be rejected.
These measures are intended to safeguard the integrity of the scientific record and maintain trust in the research published by Trans. AMMM.
Commitment to Open Science
Trans. AMMM supports the principles of open, transparent, and reproducible science. Editorial decisions are based primarily on scientific validity, methodological quality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and the value of the contribution to the scientific and medical community.
The journal does not prioritize manuscripts solely on the basis of perceived novelty, current trends, or expected citation impact. Accordingly, Trans. AMMM welcomes scientifically rigorous replication and validation studies, methodological refinements, and well-designed studies reporting negative or null results, particularly where they confirm, challenge, or extend previously published findings.
Editorial Board Responsibilites
Members of the Editorial Board support the scientific development and quality of Transactions on AMMM. Their responsibilities may include advising the Editors-in-Chief on the journal's scientific scope and strategy, identifying emerging research areas, promoting high standards of publication ethics, and supporting the peer-review process within their areas of expertise.
Editorial Board membership does not confer preferential treatment in the publication process. Manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members are subject to the same editorial and peer-review standards as all other submissions and are handled independently in accordance with the journal's conflict-of-interest policy.
Confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished information contained in a manuscript for purposes unrelated to its evaluation. Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors under the journal's single-blind peer-review model. Review reports and editorial correspondence are treated confidentially unless disclosure is required for the investigation of publication misconduct or by applicable law.