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 Process System (MPS). Once a manuscript is submitted to the Journal, the manuscript is checked by the journal’s editorial office to ensure that it is suitable to go through the normal peer review process. If the editorial office finds the manuscripts unsuitable, it may be rejected immediately. Once it is found fit, the manuscript is sent to an appropriate editor based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. All manuscripts are to be handled by an Editor, who does not have any potential conflict of interest with any of the manuscript’s authors.
If the Editor notices that the manuscript may not be of adequate 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 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 exist between these reviewers and the manuscript’s authors. The reviewers will then submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:
- Publish Unchanged
- Consider after Minor Changes
- Consider after Major Changes
- Reject: Manuscript is fallacious or not sufficiently novel.
After receiving the reports from all the reviewers, the Editor can make one of the following editorial decisions:
- Publish Unchanged
- Accepted with Minor Changes
- Accepted with Major Changes
If the Editor recommends “Publish Unchanged,” 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, and the manuscript will appear in the Articles in Press section of the journal’s website.
If the Editor recommends “Accepted with 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 reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be ultimately accepted.
If the Editor recommends “Accepted with 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 requested to review it again. Along with their review reports on the revised manuscript, the reviewers make a recommendation which can be “Publish unchanged," “Consider after Minor Changes,” “Consider after Major Changes,” or “Reject.” Then, the Editor can make an editorial recommendation which can be “Publish unchanged," “Accepted with Minor Changes,” or “Reject.”
If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.
The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority to reject any manuscript because of unsuitableness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript but he/her can suggest correction or changes to author, if needed. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal.
All the authors are informed individually on their e-mail, regarding the progressive action taken on the manuscript, during the peer review process by the editorial office. Authors may also check the status of progress of their submitted manuscript through the Medhawi’s Manuscript Processing System (MPS).
The peer-review process is double blinded; that is, neither the reviewers nor any of the authors of the manuscript know each other.