General review process
This year's MICCAI review process will follow by and large the process from previous years. However please read the following description carefully as some details will have changed. If you have questions please contact firstname.lastname@example.org
Each paper is assigned one Primary PC member and one Secondary PC member.
- Primary PC - the role of the Primary PC is to ensure all the reviews assigned to you to manage are on time and of sufficient quality. In normal circumstances, PC members will not review the paper, but will act as arbiter between reviews and rapporteurs for the paper. The Primary PC needs to actively monitor the review process and be fully prepared to recruit additional reviews if any of the assigned reviews has a chance of missing the deadline. You are responsible for making the overall recommendation of the paper to the PC meeting by consulting with the Secondary PC.
- Secondary PC - the role of the Secondary PC is to check the decision of the Primary PC and provide a second opinion where necessary, e.g., when there is a large discrepancy of the review scores. For a particular submission, if you are in full agreement with the decision of the Primary PC, usually there is very little you need to do.
Reviewer recruitment & selection
We will aim to provide a pool of high-quality reviewers for the submissions. To ensure this, reviewers will be invited on to the scientific review committee, rather than volunteering. As part of this process we require reviewers to provide an up-to-date list of their areas of expertise as well as information about their level of experience in reviewing. As a PC member you will play a key role in recruiting and vetting reviewers.
Reviewers will be pre-allocated by the PC Chairs and a small subset of the PC members who are available locally to alleviate your workload. In cases of serious concerns about the allocated reviewers the PC members should email the chairs. To avoid conflict of interests, the reviewer allocation should only be changed in coordination with the chairs. This is important as the papers are anonymized and we are aiming to maintain an approximately equal allocation (8-10) of papers to each reviewer.
Note: PC members will also remain double blinded.
Paper selection process
Based on the reviews, each Primary PC member will propose a score and recommendation for each of his/her assigned papers. The Secondary PC member will then review this score. In case of disagreement, a discussion will be initiated by the program co-chairs to try to reach a consensus.
All PC members will meet in May in London to resolve raised issues and establish the final program.
|Paper submission deadline:
||15th March 2009 (passed)|
|Papers allocated to PC members:
||22nd March 2009|
|Papers open to reviewers:
||27th March 2009|
|Deadline for reviews:
||24h April 2009|
||1st May 2009|
|Primary/Secondary PC score and recommendation completed:
||13th May 2009|
|PC meeting in London:
||17th & 18th May 2009|