The peer review board of the Journal is constituted from members of the Editorial board and is supplemented by other leading urologists and experts from radiation oncology, medical oncology, infectious disease, pathology, etc.
Articles that are received are assigned, blinded, to two appropriate peer reviewers. All identifying labels are removed from the manuscript, insofar as this is possible. For the overwhelming majority of manuscripts, this renders the contributors anonymous to the reviewers.
Reviews are performed according to a standard template which is similar to that used by other journals. Criteria for acceptance include relevance, novelty, quality of the study design and analysis, appropriateness of the tables and figures, appropriateness of the conclusion, as well as grammar, syntax, etc. Manuscripts are rated as accept, accept pending revisions, reject with opportunity to revise, or reject.
When manuscripts are rejected by one reviewer, they are sent to a third reviewer for confirmation. A manuscript which is rejected by two reviewers is formally rejected by the journal.
Issues of conflict of interest which would not be apparent to a reviewer due to this blinding are identified by a requirement of full disclosure of such conflicts by submitting authors.