Article [2]Reviewer Match

Qualified reviewers, conflicts screened first.

Start a journal free Contact us

Abstract

Reviewer Match reads the topic and methods of a manuscript and suggests reviewers whose publication history fits. Each candidate is screened for conflicts of interest with the authors before an editor sees the list, and invitations are tracked through to the submitted review.

  • Suggestions ranked by topic and methods fit, with the papers that justify them
  • Co-authorship, shared affiliation and recent collaboration screened
  • Invitations, reminders and workload tracked automatically
J. Soil Microbial Sci./JMS-2026-0418/Reviewer MatchNo conflicts found
ReviewerExpertiseMatchStatus
Dr. R. IyerRhizosphere ecology · 41 papers94Invited
Prof. M. OkaforIrrigation hydrology · 63 papers91Accepted
Dr. L. Brandt16S amplicon methods · 28 papers89Accepted
Dr. S. NakamuraSoil carbon cycling · 37 papers86Suggested
Dr. A. CastilloAgro-ecosystems · 22 papers83Suggested

Co-authorship, shared affiliation and grant overlap checked for the last 5 years.

Figure 1. Suggested reviewers for one manuscript, with match scores and invitation status.
J. Soil Microbial Sci./JMS-2026-0418/Invitations2 accepted
  • Day 2Invited Dr. R. Iyer, Prof. M. Okafor, Dr. L. Brandt
  • Day 4Prof. M. Okafor accepted · due Day 32
  • Day 5Dr. L. Brandt accepted · due Day 33
  • Day 9Reminder sent to Dr. R. Iyer
  • Day 12Dr. R. Iyer declined: on fieldwork. Suggested Dr. S. Nakamura
Figure 2. The invitation tracker for the same manuscript, with reminders and a declined invitation.
1.

Suggestions an editor can check

Every suggestion shows why it was made: the reviewer's relevant papers, their methods and how recently they published in the area. Editors can accept the list, adjust it, or add people they already know.

Your journal's own reviewer pool is searched first, so trusted reviewers are not overlooked.

  • Match explained by relevant papers
  • Your own reviewer pool searched first
  • Filters for career stage, region and recent load
2.

Conflicts screened before the invitation

Candidates are checked against the author list for co-authorship, shared affiliations and joint grants over a period your journal sets. Possible conflicts are shown with their evidence, and the editor decides.

  • Co-authorship lookback set per journal
  • Shared affiliation and funding overlap
  • Author-requested exclusions honoured
3.

Invitations that follow themselves up

Invitations, reminders and overdue notices are sent on the schedule you choose. When a reviewer declines, their suggested alternative is added to the list, and the editor can see each reviewer's current load before inviting again.

Table 1

Reviewer Match at a glance

Signals
Topic, methods, keywords and publication history
Conflict checks
Co-authorship, affiliation, funding, author exclusions
Review models
Single-blind, double-blind and open review
Reviewer credit
Review records can be sent to ORCID with consent

References

  1. [4]Editorial BoardOne workspace for decisions and letters.Read article
  2. [3]AI Integrity CheckSimilarity, image and reference screening.Read article
  3. [1]Submission DeskManuscript intake with completeness checks.Read article
Acknowledgements

Every journal on Plascipub starts the same way: one letter, fifty free submissions, and an editorial office ready the same week.

50
submissions free, no card needed
1 week
typical setup for a new journal
Ref. PLS-ACC-2026Decision: Accept

Dear Editor, we are pleased to accept your journal.

Your submissions, reviews, integrity checks, proofs and DOIs can live in one place from today. No revisions required. Start free, bring your back issues when you are ready, and keep your own branding throughout.

Start a journal free Contact us
With best wishes for your next issue,The Plascipub editorial office