Peer Review Process
Submissions should be prepared in accordance with the Author Guidelines. The manuscript may be returned to authors without a scientific assessment if they do not meet all submission requirements, if they are not in the correct format, or cannot be downloaded reliably.
Submissions must represent the original and independent work of the authors. Each new submission is assessed by Editor in Chief to determine whether it falls within the general remit of Journal. We will reject a manuscript without review if it contains insufficient content; it exceeds our word limit or is incorrectly formatted; it is poorly presented and unclear. Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment will be handled by Editor in Chief/Editorial Board to oversee the review process for contribution, originality, relevance, novelty and presentation.
Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. A double-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are unknown to reviewers. All manuscripts are subject to peer-review and authors can expect a decision. If a revision is invited, the corresponding author should submit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks. The final decision is taken by Editor in Chief based on the information gained through the peer-review process.
We ensure that the reviewed manuscript is treated confidentially prior to being published, as explained in publication ethics.
Type of Decision
Following peer-review, the paper is judged not to be acceptable for publication in this journal and resubmission is not possible.
Resubmit for Review
The submitted version of the paper is not acceptable and requires major revision, but there is clear potential in the work, and editorial is prepared to consider a new version. Authors are offered the opportunity to resubmit their paper as a new submission. Concerns will remain regarding the suitability of the paper for publication until the editors are convinced by the authors that their paper fits the scope and standards of the Journal. The resubmitted manuscript will be returned to the original associate editor if at all possible.
The paper requires changes before a final decision can be made. Authors are asked to modify their manuscript in light of comments received from referees and editors and to submit a new version for consideration within 2 weeks of receiving the decision letter. A point-by-point explanation of how comments have been addressed must be supplied with the revised version of the paper. Revisions may undergo further peer review and papers may undergo more than one round of revision. If the authors do not revise their papers to the satisfaction of the editors, the paper can still be declined from publication.
The paper is accepted for publication, subject to conditions that need to be addressed in producing a final version of the manuscript. These may include sub-editing changes and the minor amendment to ensure the paper fully matches our criteria. After final checking in the editorial office, acceptance is confirmed and the paper is forwarded to the publishers for publication.
Page proofs will be sent to the corresponding author for final checking. Corrections to the proofs must be restricted to printer’s errors: any other changes to the text, in equations or grammar, may be charged to the author. Proofs should be returned to the editors within 3 days of receipt to minimize the risk of the author’s contribution having to be held over to a later issue. The editors do not accept responsibility for the correctness of published content. It is the author’s responsibility to check the content at the proof stage.