Editorial Procedures and Peer-Review

The Editorial and peer review process will go through the following steps

Submission Process

  • Initial Submission: Authors submit their manuscript through our submission portal.
  • Successful and Unsuccessful Submission: The Managing Editor reviews the submission for adherence to our guidelines. Successful submissions proceed to desk review, while unsuccessful submissions are returned to the authors with guidance for resubmission. Incomplete submissions are removed.

Initial Checks / Desk Review

  • Ethical and Preparation Check: An editorial team member reviews the manuscript for ethical compliance and preparation according to our guidelines. Non-compliant or poorly prepared manuscripts are either rejected or returned for revision.
  • Scope and Quality Assessment: The Managing Editor, in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors, evaluates whether the manuscript fits the journal's scope and meets the scientific standards, deciding if it should move to peer review.

Peer Review Process

After passing the initial screening, a manuscript will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer review. The authors' identities are revealed to reviewers in a single-blind review. Peer review comments are strictly confidential and will only be disclosed with the reviewer's express permission. 

  • Assignment to Reviewers: Manuscripts passing the initial check are assigned to at least two independent experts for review. The review process is single-blind.
  • Round 1: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and submit their recommendations. Authors receive feedback and may be asked for revisions.
  • Round 2 (if necessary): Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated by the reviewers. Additional rounds of review may follow if further revisions are required.
  • Round 3 (if necessary)

Timeliness and Publication Volume 

The  peer review timeliness and publication volume can be essentially defined as follows:

 Publication Volume 

1 vol, 4 Issue /year

Time to First Decision

3-4 week

Review Time

1-2 Months

Authors communication

1 week

Time to submit the revision

2-3 weeks

Copy editing and Production 

 1 Month

Publication Time

4-6 Months

 Editorial Verdict and Modification Process

Every article undergoes a thorough peer-review procedure. The chief editor will relay the ultimate verdict to the corresponding author, categorized as follows:

Minor Revision are required.

Articles that are conditionally accepted with minor revisions based on feedback from reviewers will be communicated to the authors, who are then allotted five to ten days to make the necessary minor adjustments.

Major Revisions Considered

The acceptance of the manuscript is contingent upon the implementation of major revisions. Should any reviewer's critiques not be addressable through revision, the author is obliged to submit a detailed response or counterargument. Generally, a single iteration of major revisions is allowed. Authors are expected to submit their revised manuscript within an allocated timeframe for further review and comments. (Third Round)

Rejection with Option to Resubmit

Manuscripts that necessitate additional research to bolster their conclusions will be declined, with authors encouraged to reapply once the requisite experiments have been conducted.

Outright Rejection

Manuscripts will be outright rejected if they exhibit fundamental deficiencies or fail to contribute any substantial new insights. In such cases, authors are not invited to resubmit to the journal.

Copy-Editing Procedure and Publication Stage

Upon the manuscript's acceptance and the receipt of Open Access and Article Processing Fees, it will undergo a thorough copy-editing, English language refinement, author review, final adjustments, layout setting, and eventually, publication on the journal’s digital platform.

Fourth Round (Detailed Procedure)

The manuscript is forwarded to a copy editor/layout specialist. The copy-editing stage may involve requests from the copy editor for further details regarding the accepted manuscript, such as copyright or authorship information. It is the author's duty to supply the necessary documentation within the designated period.

Should any linguistic inaccuracies be identified, the author might need to seek language polishing from a qualified native speaker or professional. The preliminary final version, or galley proof, will be shared with the author within a predetermined timeframe, with extensions possible upon request to the editorial team for valid reasons.

After the copy-editing phase, the manuscript progresses to the production phase.

Production and Final Publication

This phase includes the development of the publication file, assignment of the DOI, scheduling for an issue, and planning the publication timeline. Should there be a need for any alterations during this phase, authors may incur additional charges for editing.

The manuscript is then allocated to a specific issue for publication. Authors will be informed about the successful publication of their work.

Author Appeal Process

We empowers authors with the ability to contest the rejection of their manuscripts through an email to the Editorial Office of the journal. The appeal should comprehensively address each point raised by the reviewers and/or Editor, providing detailed responses. This follows a consultative evaluation of the manuscript by the editor-in-chief, who may suggest either acceptance, further review, or confirmation of the initial rejection. Once this assessment is made, the rejection stands as final.

For Special Issues, the handling Editor submits the contested manuscript along with pertinent details to the Editor-in-Chief and the guest editor. They are then tasked with reviewing the appeal and making a recommendation, which could lead to acceptance, further peer review, or reaffirmation of the rejection. At this juncture, the decision to reject is conclusive.