The entire revision process will be done through the on-line system.

The peer review of each article concentrates on objective and technical concerns to determine whether the work has been sufficiently well conceived, structured and described. Article must be written in English and the language must be clear and unambiguous. If the language of a paper is poor, the Editor-in-chief will recommend that Authors seek independent editorial help before submission of a revision. Poor presentation and/or poor language are justifiable reasons for rejection. There are several types of decisions possible:

  1. Accepted.
  2. Minor revision. The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given 1 month for minor revisions.
  3. Major revision. The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point-by-point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a suitable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.
  4. Rejection. In case the article has serious flaws, and/or makes no original significant contribution, no offer of resubmission to the journal is provided. If additional revisions are needed to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors will be encouraged to re-submit the paper once further work have been conducted.