An open chain,
not a hidden verdict.
The Open Post-Publication Review Chain (OPPR-C) is a scholarly publication model built on a single conviction: serious work benefits from visible argument rather than opaque gatekeeping. Editorial review is fast, bounded, and documented; substantive scrutiny happens in public, over time, and remains part of the record.
- 2
- stages — Initial Publication Gate and Open Review Chain
- 5
- decision categories: Fly, Conditional Fly, Revise, Desk No-Fly, No-Fly
- 7
- criteria in the Structured Assessment Framework
- 10 / 14
- business-day maximum decision windows
No Epistemic Alarm Filter
A work cannot be rejected merely for being novel, disruptive, or paradigm-challenging. Rejection must be tied to a specific, reviewable failure against defined standards.
Review-Integrity Gate
Both positive and negative reviews must meet standards of substance, ethics, and evidence-boundedness. Promotional, abusive, or non-substantive reviews are excluded — even favourable ones.
Record Integrity
The original publication remains visible. Corrections, supplements, and revised editions attach below it. Updates are additive and traceable — never silent.
The four documents
Read in order for the full model, or jump to the section most relevant to your work.
Peer-Review Model
The philosophy of the Open Post-Publication Review Chain — a two-stage structure that separates the decision to publish from ongoing scholarly evaluation.
Model & Timeline
The end-to-end process, from submission through the Initial Publication Gate to ongoing review-chain maintenance.
Editorial Review Standards
Procedural requirements, documentation obligations, and safeguards that govern how editors apply the Initial Publication Gate.
Structured Assessment Framework
Seven criteria editors use to evaluate every submission — a process tool for consistent, standards-tied decisions.