Check the journal’s policy page, the article PDF, and trusted indexes for a clear peer-review statement, the review model, and received–accepted dates.
Ways To Check If A Paper Is Peer Reviewed
Don’t rely on a single signal. Stack quick checks: the paper itself, the journal’s policy page, and a couple of trusted records. Grab screenshots or PDFs while you’re at it.
| Method | Where To Look | Proof You’ll See |
|---|---|---|
| Paper Clues | PDF first page, footer, or end matter | Peer-review label; a line near the abstract; the “received / revised / accepted” trio |
| Journal Policy | “About,” “Peer Review,” or “Instructions for Authors” | Review model (single-blind, double-blind, open), reviewer count, timelines, exceptions |
| Index Entry | NLM Catalog, Master Journal List, Ulrichsweb | Journal status, scope notes, and a “refereed/peer-reviewed” tag where available |
| Directory | Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) | Journal record that requires a public peer review policy and labels for exceptions |
| Article Type | On the article page | Research article vs editorial, letter, news, commentary, or book review |
| Contact Check | Editorial office email | Written confirmation of the review track used for that item |
What Peer Review Looks Like On A Page
Reviewed items often carry a short sentence near the abstract that says the work was evaluated by external reviewers. Many PDFs also show dates that mark the path a manuscript took. That sequence—received, revised, accepted—signals a full pass through the system. Some journals add a badge on the article landing page or a link to public reports when they use an open model.
Article type matters. Research articles, methods papers, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews usually go out to reviewers. Editorials, news briefs, letters, book reviews, and obituaries usually don’t. A journal can be known as a peer-reviewed journal and still carry non-reviewed content, so you’re checking the item, not just the venue.
Check The Journal’s Peer Review Policy
Open the journal site and look for “About,” “Editorial Policy,” “Peer Review,” or “Instructions for Authors.” The policy should explain who reviews, how many reviewers are used, whether identities are hidden, and how exceptions are labeled. Journals that follow good practice publish this in plain view and keep it current. COPE lays out clear expectations for ethical, accountable reviewing and urges journals to be transparent about their process; see the COPE guidelines.
Match Policy To Practice
Pick a couple of recent research articles and compare their date stamps to the timelines the site claims. If the policy promises two independent reviews, you should see at least a clear record of submission and acceptance, often with one or more revision dates. Some open model journals publish review histories; if you see them, that’s solid proof in one click.
Use Trusted Indexes And Directories
Indexes and directories help you confirm the journal’s stance and record. They won’t certify an individual paper, yet they do show whether the journal declares a peer review process and how it frames that process.
National Library Of Medicine Notes
PubMed is a search engine, not a peer-review switch. You can remove letters, editorials, and news with filters, then check the journal record in the NLM Catalog. The support center is clear: there’s no peer-review limiter and no master list of peer-reviewed journals, so you still need to verify the article type and the policy on the journal site. NLM’s note is here: NLM support statement.
Directory Of Open Access Journals
DOAJ accepts only journals that review research content and that publish a public peer review policy. Their application guide spells this out and asks journals to state the method they use. If an article didn’t follow the usual route, the journal should label that exception at the article level. See DOAJ’s guide to applying.
Ulrichsweb And “Refereed”
Where you have access, Ulrichsweb lists a “refereed/peer-reviewed” tag for serials that vet content through experts. It’s handy for a quick venue check. If you can’t reach it, rely on the publisher’s policy page and the clues on the article itself.
Web Of Science Master Journal List
The Master Journal List provides a profile per journal and links to the publisher’s policy. Use it to confirm the title, ISSN, and basic editorial notes, then click through to the journal site for the review details you need for proof.
Confirming Peer Review Status Of A Journal Article
When you need a firm answer for one item, build a short chain of evidence. Start with the article page, then the PDF, then the policy page, then an index entry. If the trail still feels thin, send a short email to the editorial office with the DOI link and ask which track that piece followed.
Fast Step-By-Step Path
- Open the article landing page. Scan for the article type. If it says editorial, letter, or news, you likely have a non-reviewed item.
- Open the PDF. Check the front matter and end matter for a peer-review sentence and the received–accepted dates.
- Click the journal’s “Peer Review” or “Editorial Policy” page and make sure the model matches the year of the issue.
- Look up the journal in a trusted record to confirm the title and ISSN. Note anything that helps you match the venue to the policy.
- If doubt remains, email the journal office and ask whether that specific article was externally reviewed.
Short Email Template You Can Use
Subject: Peer review status for [Article Title] (DOI: ______)
Hello Editorial Office — I’m confirming the review track for the article linked above. Was this item externally peer-reviewed under your standard model? A one-line reply is perfect. Thanks.
Red Flags That Call For A Closer Look
These signs don’t prove anything on their own. They just tell you to slow down and confirm the trail:
- No policy page, or a one-line claim with no detail.
- Promises of guaranteed acceptance.
- Processing times that don’t match the date stamps you see on PDFs.
- Research claims packed into a piece labeled as news, advertorial, or editorial.
- “Editorial review only” on work that presents new data.
Close Variations You’ll See In Labels
Journals don’t always use the same words. You might see “refereed,” “externally reviewed,” “reviewed by independent experts,” or “scientific review.” All point to the same idea: people outside the author team read the manuscript and gave a verdict before it went live.
When The Study Is A Preprint
Preprints sit outside journal workflows. They’re posted first and updated in public. Some servers attach community comments or badges from third-party pilots, but that isn’t the same as a journal’s formal process. If your setting expects a reviewed source, try to cite the later, published version or request a clear statement from the journal that handled the work.
Database Tips That Save Time
Search tools differ in how they label content. Use the tricks below to speed up checks and avoid blind spots.
| Database | What Helps | Caveat |
|---|---|---|
| PubMed | Filter by Article Type to strip letters, editorials, and news; then open the journal’s record | No peer-review limiter; a reviewed journal can still host non-reviewed items |
| DOAJ | Listing requires a public peer review policy and clear labels when an item follows another route | Great for venue checks, not a verdict on a single paper |
| Master Journal List | Profiles link to publisher policies and basic editorial notes | Some details sit behind sign-in; always confirm on the journal site |
How To Read A Peer Review Policy
A clear policy explains who reviews, how many reviewers are used, whether identities are hidden, and what happens when a piece is handled by editors only. It should describe screening for plagiarism and conflicts, outline typical timelines, and point out where exceptions are labeled. DOAJ’s rules ask journals to state the method used and to mark exceptions at the article level; that helps readers see what kind of scrutiny each item received.
Common Models You’ll Meet
- Single-blind: Reviewers see author names; authors don’t see reviewer names.
- Double-blind: Identities hidden both ways during review.
- Open: Identities revealed, sometimes with public reports.
Small But Telling Details
Scan for a named editor in chief, a working contact address for the editorial office, and a dated policy document. If the site says two independent reviews per article, sample recent issues and see whether the timing looks realistic. If the site mentions badges for reviewed work, click through and save them with your notes.
How To Document Your Check For Audits
Save the PDF, the policy page, and the relevant index page as files. Add the date, the URLs, and a one-line note on what you found. If you emailed the journal, save the reply with the article record. That tiny habit turns a hallway claim into a verified trail.
Taking Peer Review Claims At Face Value Vs Proof
Marketing blurbs on a homepage can sound fine while telling you little. Proof lives in policy text you can quote and in article pages you can save. Always match the claim to details you can verify on the site and inside the PDF.
Confirm The Basics Before You Cite
Ask yourself four quick questions before you drop a citation into your draft:
- Is this item labeled as a research article or another type?
- Does the PDF show the received–accepted path or a clear review note?
- Does the journal site publish a peer review policy that fits the issue date?
- Do your saved files show the same story across the paper, the policy, and a trusted record?
Recap You Can Use Right Away
Start with the item, confirm on the journal site, then cross-check in a record you trust. PubMed filters help you weed out non-research items, but there’s no peer-review switch, as the NLM support note explains. DOAJ entries require a public policy and clear labels for any exception, as set out in the DOAJ guide. For the ethics of good reviewing and the level of transparency you should expect, point to the COPE guidance. When in doubt, ask the journal, save the reply, and move on with confidence.