Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are sent for double-blind peer review. Authors and reviewers remain unknown to one another throughout the process, so that each submission is judged strictly on its scientific merit rather than the reputation of those involved. Manuscripts must not be under consideration elsewhere, nor previously published in any form. Submission and review take place entirely through a secure online system.
Peer Review Process
|
Stage |
Description |
|
1. Initial Editorial Pre-Check |
On submission, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Associate Editor reviews the manuscript for fit with the journal's scope, adherence to formatting and preparation guidelines, and compliance with ethical requirements such as ethics approval and informed consent, where applicable. A similarity/plagiarism screening is carried out at this stage as well. Manuscripts falling short of these standards may be desk-rejected or returned to the authors for correction. |
|
2. Reviewer Assignment |
Manuscripts that pass the pre-check are forwarded to a qualified Associate Editor or subject-matter expert, who examines the academic quality and methodology, judges whether the work is ready for external review, and identifies at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise. |
|
3. External Peer Review |
A minimum of two independent reviewers examine the manuscript for originality and contribution to the field, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, quality of data analysis, and clarity of presentation. Confidentiality of both reviewer and author identities is maintained throughout. |
|
4. Final Decision |
The Editor-in-Chief renders a final decision based on the reviewers' reports and the handling editor's recommendation. Acceptance typically requires at least two favorable reviews; where recommendations conflict, a third independent reviewer may be consulted. |
|
5. Publication |
Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copy-editing and is returned to the authors for final approval before a publication-ready PDF is prepared and made available online. |
Editorial Decisions
|
Decision |
Description |
|
Accept |
Manuscript is accepted as submitted. |
|
Minor Revision |
Accepted subject to minor changes consistent with reviewer comments. |
|
Major Revision |
Substantial revision and resubmission required, together with a point-by-point response to reviewers. |
|
Reject and Encourage Resubmission |
Considerable additional work is needed; the manuscript may later be resubmitted as a new submission. |
|
Reject |
Declined on account of serious methodological flaws, ethical concerns, or insufficient originality; resubmission is not permitted. |
Authors are expected to address each reviewer comment individually and to set out clearly, in their response letter, any points on which they disagree with the reviewers.
Review Duration and Complaints Policy
Peer review generally takes between one to three months to complete, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript. We committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly and transparently.
|
Step |
Description |
|
Appeal Submission |
Authors wishing to contest an editorial decision may write directly to the Editor-in-Chief. |
|
Acknowledgment |
Complaints are acknowledged within ten working days of receipt. |
|
Status Updates |
Authors are kept informed at roughly two-week intervals until the matter is resolved. |
|
Final Ruling |
The Editor-in-Chief's decision on any appeal is final. |
Publication
After acceptance, manuscripts are copy-edited and returned to authors for final approval. A publication-ready PDF is then prepared and published online.
All articles appear as open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license, and authors retain copyright of their work. Each article receives a DOI and is archived for long-term preservation.
Indexing
Following publication, articles are submitted to relevant indexing databases for potential inclusion and wider dissemination.
Becoming a Reviewer
Qualified experts wishing to join our reviewer pool are welcome to contact the editorial office directly.
