Manuscript Review Steps

• The Editor-in-Chief sends invitations to potential reviewers he believes are appropriate for the manuscript. As responses are received, other invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required two admissions are accepted.
• Potential reviewers consider the invitation based on their experience, conflict of interest, and availability. Then they accept or reject. If possible, upon refusal, they may also suggest alternative reviewers.
• The process of double blind-peer review generally involves an exchange between the Chief-in-Editor and the team of reviewers, also known as the referees. After the referees receive the manuscript from the editor, they read it thoroughly and comprehensively and provide individual critiques, usually within four weeks.
•  The Editor-in-Chief closely observes all reviews received before making a comprehensive decision. In the case of conflicting opinions, the Editor-in-Chief usually sends the manuscript to a third reviewer for confirmation.
• The Editor-in-Chief sends the decision through the journal email to the submitting/ corresponding author, including any relevant comments of the editor and reviewers, in a completely blind manner.
• The corresponding author needs to go through and consider the comments of the reviewers carefully as the revision will largely be based on those comments.
• The authors also need to respond to each comment point by point indicating the change, whether or not a revision can be done or give sufficient information properly. After the revision is done, the corresponding author submits the revised paper again to the journal.