The corpus of reviewers is the linchpin of the journal. It is composed of ad hoc reviewers who are mobilized to issue a critical and constructive opinion on the submissions. These notices, anonymous for the authors, may take the form of acceptance as is, request for minor or major changes, rejection with invitation for a new submission fully amended, or final rejection. These colleagues are solicited according to the needs of the journal by the editorial board on the basis of their areas of expertise. Opinions are summarized by the associate editors in charge of the manuscript and the final decision of publication or rejection is made by the editor-in-chief. When these reviewers are asked to review the text, the editor reminds them of the need to be constructive in their remarks and to adopt wording that limits the risk of vexation of the authors. It is explicitly suggested that they position themselves as coaches for submissions with real academic potential. The quality of proofreading is evaluated by the associate editors on a 5-point scale: poor, average, good, very good and excellent. This assessment, combined with other indicators, makes it possible to build up a corpus of reviewers who ensure a high level scientific assessment.
Since the arrival of our new team in 2018, we have built up a database of 402 reviewers from 17 countries and more than 150 institutions. Of this corpus, 98 performed proofreading for the review and 77 received very good and/or excellent ratings. They come from 46 institutions and 7 different countries. These evaluations allow us to exclude reviewers who do not meet our quality requirements.