Editorial Workflow

Editorial workflow

The following is the editorial workflow that every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes during the course of the peer-review process.

  The entire editorial workflow is performed using the online Manuscript Tracking System. Once a manuscript is submitted for publication, the manuscript is checked by the journal’s editorial office to ensure that it is suitable to go through the normal peer review process. Once this is done, the manuscript is sent to an appropriate Editor based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. The science editor previews the manuscript, who does not have any potential conflict of interest with any of the manuscript’s authors.

  If the Science Editor finds that the manuscript may not be of sufficient quality to go through the normal peer review process, or that the subject of the manuscript may not be appropriate for the journal’s scope, the manuscript shall be rejected with no further processing. If the Science Editor finds that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, they should assign the manuscript to a number of external reviewers, provided that no conflict of interests exists between these reviewers and the manuscript’s authors. The Science Editor urges the peer reviewers to complete the peer review in a timely and meaningful manner, or finds new reviewer(s); The reviewers will then submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:

    Publish Unaltered

    Consider after Minor Changes

    Consider after Major Changes

    Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel

  When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations:

    Publish Unaltered

    Consider after Minor Changes

    Consider after Major Changes

    Reject

  The science editor reviews the peer reviewer’s comments; upon article resubmission, the science editor confirms whether the authors have revised the manuscript according to the peer reviewer’s comments. The science editor conducts electronic screenings to detect duplicate publications. The science editor checks all the files submitted, then sends the manuscript and all its related documents to the editorial director for further review. The editorial director evaluates the academic and language quality of the manuscript and completes the review report to be delivered to the editor-in-chief. The editor-in-chief checks whether the manuscript’s editing meets the quality standard and completes the task list to approve the manuscript’s final acceptance.

  If the editor-in-chief recommends “Publish Unaltered,” the manuscript will undergo a final check by the journal’s editorial office in order to ensure that the manuscript and its review process adhere to the journal’s guidelines and policies. Once this is done, the authors will be notified of the manuscript’s acceptance.

  If the editor-in-chief recommends “Consider after Minor Changes,” the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The editor-in-chief reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the  editor-in-chief is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.

  If the editor-in-chief recommends “Consider after Major Changes,” the authors are expected to revise their manuscript in accordance with that recommendation and to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the original reviewers are asked to review it. Along with their review reports on the revised manuscript, the reviewers make a recommendation which can be “Publish Unaltered,” “Consider after Minor Changes,” “Consider after Major Changes,” or “Reject.” Then, the Editor can make an editorial recommendation which can be “Publish Unaltered,” “Consider after Minor Changes,” or “Reject.”

  If the editor-in-chief recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.

TMR Data ExpandedMore

ScientistsMore

NoticesMore