Editorial Team

Editorial Office Contact

  • Email: BJOSScience@gmail.com 

 

Editorial Board

The British Journal of Surgical Science (BJSS) is supported by an international Editorial Board comprising experienced academic surgeons and clinicians. The Editorial Board is responsible for maintaining the scientific quality, integrity, and ethical standards of the journal.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial, financial, or institutional influence. Decisions are based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

Editorial Structure

  • Editor-in-Chief
  • Associate Editors
  • Section Editors
  • Editorial Board Members

Editor-in-Chief

A. Hussain, MBChB, FICMS, FRCSI, FRCSEng, FRCS (General Surgery), FEBS (General Surgery)
Homerton University Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Specialty: Upper GI and Bariatric Surgery

Section Editors

Upper Gastrointestinal & Bariatric Surgery

  • Hatem Al-Saadi, MD, FRCS, FEBS, FFSTEd
    Sohar Hospital, Oman
  • Srinivasan Balchandra, MBBS, MD, FRCSI, FRCS (GS)
    Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom
  • Corinne Owers, MSc, PhD, FRCS
    Blackpool Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom
  • Nehemiah Samuel, MBBS, FRCS, MD, PGCert MedEd
    Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom
  • Sashi Yeluri, FRCS
    Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom
  • Peter Vasas, MD, PhD, MRCS
    Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom

General Surgery

  • Niraj Khetan, FRCS
    Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, United Kingdom
  • Robert Podlasek, MD, PhD
    District Hospital Strzyżów, Poland
  • Alaa Al-Wadees, FRCS
    Jabir Bin Hyan University, Iraq
  • Ismail Heyder Mohamed, MBChB, MRCS, FRCSEd
    Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, United Kingdom

Transplant Surgery

  • Pankaj Chandak, FRCS (Transplant Surgery)
    Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
  • Rithin Punjala, MBBS, MRCS, MS (General Surgery)
    Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

Bariatric & Metabolic Surgery

  • Prof. Radwan Kassir, MD, PhD
    University Hospital Centre of Saint-Denis, France
  • Prof. Safauldeen S Nima, MD
    University of Kufa, Iraq
  • Dr. Salman Al-Sabah, MD, MBA, FRCSC, FACS
    Kuwait University / Al-Amiri Hospital, Kuwait

Minimally Invasive Surgery

  • Prof. Dr. Attilia Csendes, MD, PhD
    University Hospital, Santiago, Chile
  • Khalid Hamdan, FRCS
    Healthpoint Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
  • Prof. Dr. Basim Alkhfaji, FRCS
    Canadian Specialist Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Obstetrics & Gynaecology

  • Dr. Haider Hussain, MRCPI O&G
    Letterkenny University Hospital, Republic of Ireland
  • Osama Naji, MRCOG, MD
    Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

Ophthalmology

  • Dr. Haidar Al-Hakim, MBBS, MRCOphth
    University of Al-Kafeel, Iraq

Editorial Board Members

  • Theevashini Krishnasamy, MRCS, MS
    University Technology MARA, Malaysia

Responsibilities of Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board members are responsible for:

  • Supporting the peer review process
  • Advising on editorial policy and journal scope
  • Recommending suitable peer reviewers
  • Upholding ethical publishing standards
  • Promoting the journal within the academic community

Conflict of Interest

All Editorial Board members are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. These are managed in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Appointment and Review

Editorial Board members are appointed based on academic merit, clinical expertise, and contributions to surgical science. Membership is reviewed periodically to ensure active participation and relevance.

Editorial Transparency

BJSS maintains transparency in its editorial processes. All submissions undergo independent peer review, and editorial decisions are made without external influence.

Editorial decisions are independent of commercial or institutional influence.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peer Review Policy

The British Journal of Surgical Science (BJSS) follows a rigorous, transparent, and structured double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality, integrity, and relevance of all published work.

1. Reviewer Selection Criteria

Each submitted manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers.

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Subject-specific expertise relevant to the manuscript
  • Academic qualifications and research experience
  • Publication history in peer-reviewed journals
  • Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or subject matter
  • Ability to provide timely, objective, and constructive feedback

The editorial office maintains a diverse international reviewer database to ensure appropriate expertise for all submissions.

2. Editorial Workflow Stages

All manuscripts follow a structured editorial workflow:

Step 1: Initial Editorial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or assigned Editor conducts an initial screening to assess:

  • Relevance to journal scope
  • Basic scientific quality
  • Compliance with ethical standards
  • Plagiarism screening results

Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be rejected without external review.

Step 2: Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts passing initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind process where:

  • Authors are not informed of reviewer identities
  • Reviewers are not informed of author identities

Reviewers evaluate:

  • Scientific validity and methodology
  • Originality and novelty
  • Clinical relevance
  • Clarity and structure
  • Ethical compliance

Step 3: Editorial Decision

After receiving reviewer reports, the handling editor evaluates all feedback and recommends one of the following:

  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewer recommendations and editorial judgment.

3. Handling Conflicting Reviewer Recommendations

In cases where reviewer recommendations conflict (e.g., one accepts and one rejects), the following process is applied:

  • The handling editor evaluates the strength and justification of each review
  • Additional expert review may be requested if necessary
  • The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision after considering all available evidence

The decision is based on scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal scope.

4. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors must:

  • Respond to each reviewer comment in detail
  • Highlight changes made in the manuscript
  • Resubmit within the specified timeframe

Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by original reviewers or new reviewers depending on the extent of revisions required.

Multiple rounds of revision may occur before a final editorial decision is made.

5. Appeals Process

Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe there has been a misunderstanding or procedural error.

Appeals must:

  • Be submitted in writing to the editorial office
  • Clearly state the reasons for appeal
  • Provide evidence or clarification supporting the appeal

Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where necessary, an independent editorial board member not involved in the original decision.

The appeal outcome may result in:

  • Upholding the original decision
  • Requesting additional review
  • Re-evaluation of the manuscript

The final decision following an appeal is considered binding.

6. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial, institutional, or personal influence. Decisions are based solely on scientific merit, originality, and relevance to surgical science.

7. Confidentiality

All manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential documents. They are not shared outside the editorial and peer review process.

8. Ethical Standards

BJSS follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in all aspects of peer review and editorial decision-making. Any suspected misconduct is handled in accordance with COPE best practices.