Check the article page for Received/Accepted dates, read the journal’s peer-review policy, and confirm the title in NLM Catalog or DOAJ.
When you’re weighing health claims, the first task is to sort peer-reviewed studies from everything else. This guide gives you fast, reliable steps to confirm whether a source in health research went through editorial peer review. You’ll see quick tells on an article page, places to double-check a journal’s policy, and safe ways to use non-reviewed material without mislabeling it.
Ways To Check If A Source Is Peer Reviewed In Health Research
Start with the article itself. Reputable journals stamp each paper with submission history near the top or bottom of the page. Look for a line that shows dates, often in this order: “received,” “revised,” and “accepted.” That trio signals editorial handling and external review. Many publishers also place a short label such as “peer reviewed,” the review model used, and the editor’s name.
Next, scan the journal’s policy pages. Every serious health journal describes its review model and ethical rules. If the site hides this information or keeps it vague, treat the source with caution until you verify the title in a trusted index.
Use the checklist below as a fast screen. If two or more checks fail, pause and verify through an index before citing the source as peer-reviewed.
| What To Check | Where To Find It | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Submission dates | Article page or PDF | Signals editorial handling and acceptance |
| Peer-review label or model | Article page; policy page | Shows if single-blind, double-blind, or open review is in use |
| Editor or handling editor | Article page | Confirms the editorial path |
| Peer-review policy | Journal “About” or “Policies” | Details the process and exceptions |
| Board list with affiliations | Journal site | Shows real oversight and expertise |
| Index record | NLM Catalog or DOAJ | Independent confirmation of review policy |
| ISSN and publisher | Journal site; catalog | Stable identity and route to ownership info |
Step-By-Step: From Article Page To Independent Proof
1) Article page: find the submission timeline. Many pages show it right under the title or near the references. You may also see a handling editor, a manuscript number, or a statement on review type. 2) PDF: scroll to the first or last page for the same timeline. 3) Journal homepage: open “About,” “Editorial policies,” or “Instructions for authors” to read the stated review process. 4) Independent record: search the title or journal in a trusted catalog to confirm that the journal runs peer review and meets basic selection standards.
Independent records matter because article pages can change, and not every platform labels items with the same care. Trusted catalogs record the journal’s scope, publisher, ISSN, and policy basics. They also flag titles that meet set criteria for editorial quality, ethical oversight, and peer review.
Checking Whether A Source Is Peer Reviewed In Health Research: Common Edge Cases
Preprints host early versions that haven’t gone through journal review. Some look polished and may carry author responses, yet they remain non-reviewed unless a linked journal version exists. Conference papers can be reviewed or not; the journal or series usually states the screening level on the site. Repository copies can be accepted manuscripts or postprints; read the header and rights line to see which one you have.
Editorials, letters, news pieces, and viewpoints usually skip external review or receive only editorial checks. Clinical practice guidelines can be vetted rigorously, yet that process differs from journal peer review. When you cite them, label them accurately and do not imply they are journal-reviewed unless the document states so.
How To Read Signals On A Journal Website
Open the “About” or “Editorial policies” page. Find the section named peer review. You should see the model used, who reviews what, and how many reviewers are typical for an original study. Look for policies on editor-authored papers, conflicts of interest, trial registration, and data sharing. Reputable sites also list the editorial board with names and affiliations.
What A Clear Policy Page Includes
Plain language on scope, who reviews which article types, timelines, appeals, how editor-authored work is handled, and links to ethics guidance. A contacts page with named staff helps as well.
Check for membership or alignment with widely used guidance. Many health titles state that they follow the ICMJE recommendations and reporting standards such as CONSORT or PRISMA. Those signals don’t replace your own checks, yet they raise confidence that the journal runs a clear review process.
PubMed, MEDLINE, And Other Indexes: What They Do And Don’t Do
PubMed is a search platform that includes MEDLINE records, PubMed Central records, and other citations. You can’t filter directly for “peer-reviewed” inside PubMed, and not every item retrieved is a reviewed article. That said, journals selected for MEDLINE must show a formal peer-review process and meet selection standards. Use the journal’s record in the NLM Catalog to see whether it’s indexed in MEDLINE and to read notes on the title.
DOAJ lists open access journals that pass a screening based on transparency and editorial quality. A DOAJ record includes the declared peer-review model and links to the policy page. Presence in DOAJ does not rate scientific merit, yet it does confirm that review and policy basics are in place for that title.
Quick Visual Cues On An Article Page
Look near the abstract box and the end of the PDF. Many platforms print the timeline in small caps. Some add a “Peer review statement” with a link to the policy. If you see only a posted date and nothing else, dig further before you tag it as reviewed.
Use NLM Catalog To Confirm Indexing
Open the catalog record for the journal and scan the field named “Current indexing status.” If it says the title is indexed in the main MEDLINE segment, the journal passed a review of scope, editorial quality, and ethical practice. The record also shows the publisher, the country, and the ISSN, which helps you avoid look-alike titles.
If the record shows only “PubMed,” that means citations reach PubMed through other routes. In that case you still need to read the journal’s peer-review policy on its site. The catalog listing is a pointer, not a blanket rating for every item you’ll find through PubMed.
Use DOAJ For Open Access Journals
Search the journal name or ISSN in the directory. Each record states the peer-review model, links to the policy, and shows the license and archiving plan. Many health titles in DOAJ also display machine-readable metadata, which helps with tracking and preservation.
What Peer Review Models Mean
Single-blind: reviewers know the author names, authors don’t see reviewer names. Double-blind: identities hidden both ways. Open review: reports or names may be public. Models differ, but the core is the same: outside experts read the work before acceptance.
Study Types And What Review Covers
Original research papers receive detailed scrutiny on methods and results. Reviews check synthesis and citation practice. Short reports and brief communications still go to reviewers, though timelines can be faster. Supplements and special series sometimes run extra guest editors; the policy should describe how those are handled.
Reproducible Notes You Can Store
Create a small template in your reference manager or lab wiki. Add fields for the submission timeline, editor, review model, journal policy URL, and index records. When a teammate picks up the file, they can retrace your path instantly.
Why The Editor Line Helps
A named handling editor shows stewardship. It also gives teams a contact when a correction or clarification is needed. If the page lists only a generic mailbox, make sure the journal’s board and leadership are easy to find on the site.
Grey Literature And Policy Briefs
Public health often leans on government reports, advisories, and health-technology assessments. These documents may use expert panels and public comment. That process differs from journal peer review, so label them as grey literature or guidance and cite the issuing body.
When A Journal Is New
New titles can be legitimate yet still building a track record. Check whether the editorial team lists full names and affiliations linked to real profiles. Read a few recent articles to see whether timelines look realistic and reviewer reports are referenced or shared.
Cross-Checks That Take Seconds
Paste the journal name into your search engine with the word “scam” or “predatory” and scan results. Look up the publisher’s other titles and see if they carry the same policy pages. Search the ISSN in multiple places to spot inconsistencies.
Library Tools That Can Help
Many campus libraries subscribe to catalogs that label peer-reviewed journals. Ask a librarian for access to those tools if your team screens large sets. They can also help you request missing policy pages from a publisher.
Smart Use Of Non-Reviewed Material
Health fields move fast, and you’ll meet preprints, data sets, and regulatory briefs. Use them for background or signals on emerging work, but avoid treating them as conclusive findings. If you cite a preprint, say that it’s a preprint, link the record, and check again later for a journal version.
Practical Workflow You Can Reuse
1) Save the full citation and DOI. 2) Capture a screenshot of the submission timeline. 4) Add an independent record from the NLM Catalog or DOAJ. 5) Store all notes with the PDF so anyone on your team can retrace the steps. Keep screenshots with your citation file.
Quality Signals Beyond Peer Review
Peer review is one screen. Pair it with study design, statistical reporting, sample size, registration status, and data availability. Check whether the article cites prior trials or systematic reviews and whether outcomes line up with the registered protocol. Read competing interests and funding statements with care.
Platform Clues For Peer Review
Different platforms mark peer review in different ways. Use the table below to match labels to verification steps. When in doubt, fall back to the journal’s policy page and an independent catalog record.
| Platform | Peer-Review Markers | Verification Steps |
|---|---|---|
| PubMed record | Publication type tags; link to journal; no peer-review filter | Open the NLM Catalog record for the journal to check selection and policy notes |
| PubMed Central | Final versions or author manuscripts; look for journal info on the record | Follow the journal link; check policy and submission dates |
| Journal site | Received/accepted dates; review model; editor names | Capture a screenshot and copy the policy URL |
| DOAJ | Peer-review model and policy link in the record | Confirm the ISSN and match it to the site |
| Preprint server | Labels such as “preprint,” “version,” “posted” date | Treat as non-reviewed until a journal version is linked |
| Google Scholar | Citations and versions; no peer-review flag | Trace to the journal page; never assume review from Scholar alone |
Red Flags That Call For Extra Checks
Big claims with no submission dates. An empty or tiny editorial board. A scope that swings wildly across unrelated fields. Promises of one-week acceptance. A journal name or URL that mimics a well-known title. Broken links for ethics policies. Fees that change at checkout. Unclear contact details. If two or more of these appear, slow down and verify everything.
How To Phrase Peer-Review Status In Your Writing
Be precise and brief. Here are neutral patterns that give readers clarity without over-selling:
• “Randomized trial, peer-reviewed journal article.”
• “Regulatory guidance; not a peer-reviewed article.”
• “Preprint posted on a server; a journal version not yet available.”
• “Conference paper; series states external review for research papers.”
Repeatable Peer-Review Checks For Teams
Build a tiny SOP and stick to it: screenshot the submission dates, copy the peer-review policy URL, add an index record, and store everything with the PDF. That routine takes minutes and prevents guesswork later when a reader, reviewer, or editor asks how you verified the source.