Publishing process

The Journal focuses publishing articles of high technical quality, acknowledged and highly appreciated by the science community. The publishing process includes the following steps:

Step 1: Initial quality check

After you submit your manuscript, we'll check that it complies with the Journal’s aims and scope, and format as required. This step includes checks on authorship, competing interests, ethics approval and plagiarism. These checks aim at ensuring a fair and thorough assessment of your work

Step 2: Editorial Board Member evaluation

Once your manuscript passes the Step 1, we assign it to a member of our Editorial Board, who is an active researcher in your field. If the Editorial Board is satisfied that your manuscript is appropriate to send out to peer review, we will then choose at least two appropriate peer reviewers (who are experts in the areas of your manuscript and have publications related to the areas of your manuscript) to evaluate your work. You may suggest potential reviewers but please keep in mind that we are not obliged to follow these recommendations. You may also name upto 3 individuals or laboratories who should not review your manuscript; these exclusions will be honoured. The Journal applies double-blind peer review, so both author(s) will not know the information of reviewers, and vice versa.

Step 3: Peer review

Reviewers will assess the technical soundness and scientific validity of your methods, analysis and interpretation, all of which must be appropriate, properly conducted, ethically robust and fully supported by the data. The peer reviewers then submit written reports and comments, which are delivered to the Journal.

Step 4: Decision

The Editorial Board will then decide whether to accept your work at its current form, or request minor or major revisions, or reject the paper due to unresolvable concerns.

* If you are invited to prepare a revision during a specific deadline, you need to prepare your revised manuscript according to the reviewers’ requirements. After that, you will re-submit your revised manuscript, which should be accompanied by a point-by-point response letter explaining how you have responded to the issues raised in review, and the resulting changes to your manuscript. Once resubmitted, the manuscript may then be sent back to the original referees or to new referees, at the Editorial Board's discretion.

Accepted manuscripts typically undergo one or two rounds of revision before being accepted for publication.

Once accepted, you will receive a copy of the accepted paper prior to publication and then check it carefully to ensure that scientific accuracy has been maintained during the formatting process. At this stage, only subsequent changes to the title, author list or scientific errors will be permitted, and all corrections must be approved by the Journal.

The Journal will let you know the acceptance of your submission and may grant an Acceptance Letter to author(s) if necessary.

* If we reject your manuscript: A decision to reject a manuscript would occur if the Editorial Board feels your manuscript would not be suitable for publication even after revision.

If you have strong evidence that the decision on your manuscript was influenced by scientific misunderstanding or reviewer bias, you may request that the Editorial Board reconsiders the rejection decision. As we receive a high volume of submissions and focus on ensuring quality service for all authors, appeals of rejected manuscripts must take second place to the normal workload. Final decisions on appeals are made by the Editorial Board. Decisions are reversed on appeal only if the Editorial Board is convinced that the original decision was a serious mistake, such as a referee making substantial errors of fact or showing evidence of bias, and only when the manuscript is accepted by the second round of peer review.