Peer Review Policy

Peer review is the process we use to assess the quality of a manuscript to see if it suitable for publication. Independent researchers with similar competencies assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and importance to help our Editors determine if a manuscript is suitable for publication in their journal.

We utilise a single-blind peer-review system, which is considered to be self-regulating. Reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of the authors, but the reviewer assessments provided to authors are completely anonymous. The single-blind peer review system is the most commonly-used method of review and most Reviewers are comfortable with this approach, as it facilitates an impartial appraisal of a manuscript.

Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by two or more referees who evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically logical and well-constructed, focussing specifically on if it duplicates previously published work, and if there are clear grounds for it to be considered for publication. The Editors establish their decision based on these reports and, if necessary, they can discuss with members of the Editorial Board.

We aim to provide authors with a first decision (of accept, reject or revisions required whether minor or major) within 4 weeks.

Authors can check the status of their manuscript at any time by logging into the journal's submission system, Editorial Manager.

Appeals and complaints
If you would like to appeal a rejection decision or make a complaint, please contact the Publisher who will outline the journal's complaints procedure.