Search Frequenty Asked Questions

A panel of peer’s reviews all manuscripts published in the Review with expertise in the subject matter addressed. Reviewers review articles in terms of substance, originality, validity, clarity, significance, and for policy implications and/or relevancy. Manuscripts are reviewed by three reviewers. However, on occasion it is not unusual for a manuscript to be reviewed by an additional reviewer if the complexity of the topic warrants such a review.

We rely heavily on the review you will provide us as our best means of enhancing the presentation of the author(s) and ensuring that the manuscript meets the high standards of the Review. Guidelines for Peer Reviewers define specific review criteria and procedures. We ask that you explain your recommendations on a separate sheet in clear, typewritten form. You may also redline specific comments in the manuscript. In commenting, please consider the following five critical elements: (1) originality, (2) appropriateness of approach and design, (3) policy implications and/or relevancy, (4) soundness of conclusions, and (5) effectiveness of figures and tables.

An unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. We ask that you review and handle this manuscript in the strictest of confidence. Please refer to the Confidentiality and Disclosure Statement and we ask that you observe the restrictions outlined.

After your technical review, and if the article is accepted for publication, it will be edited for style, grammar, spelling, and construction by our editorial staff.

We sincerely appreciate your assistance in reviewing as the peer review process plays a critical role in the success of ensuring that the journal is accurate and relevant.

If you have never reviewed for the Health Care Financing Review and would be interested in doing so, please fill out the Peer Reviewer Request Form (.pdf 43 KB) and e-mail to lwolf@cms.hhs.gov