Single Blind Peer Review
After manuscripts clear the initial screening, they are sent to Reviewer. The editor will send the manuscript to a minimum of 2 reviewers for single blind peer review. The peer review process is an essential element of the publication cycle. All manuscripts submitted to our journals will undergo extensive peer review by our reviewers. Flow diagram in Figure 1 is the editorial workflow that all submitted manuscripts undergo.
Reviewers submit the evaluation results along with their recommendations as one of the following actions:
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
We have a single blinded peer-review process in which the reviewers know who the authors of the manuscript are, but the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer reviewers are. Our journal acknowledges the researchers who have performed the peer-review and without the significant contributions made by these researchers, the publication of the journal would not be possible. We try our best to adhere to the guidelines laid out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We also forward the guidelines to our reviewers to ensure the highest ethical standards of evaluation.
The Reviewer Report (Comments) is a online, which is filled and commented. It contains title of the article but does not contain the identity details of the reviewer. Reviewer’s identity is kept anonymous. It is because Reviewers’ Report is shared with the author(s) for the purpose of improving their manuscript. This Reviewer’s Report can be updated in online system. Reviewers are given 1-2 weeks to write their rating and comment.
In order for the Editor to provide a recommendation regarding the manuscript, at least 2 completed reviews are required. Once the reviewers have submitted their comments, the Editor will then arrange to send the article to the corresponding author along with Reviewers’ Reports and her/his own recommendation, if any. The Editor delivers and informs the author of the final decision too. If the manuscript is conditionally accepted, author(s) will be required to revise their manuscript according to the Editor’s suggestions and submit a revised version of their manuscript for further evaluation. Our Editorial Workflow allows Editors to reject manuscripts due to a number of reasons including inappropriateness of the subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of the results. We ensure high quality and unbiased peer-review by sending the manuscript for evaluation to a range of reviewers in different parts of the world.