Once a manuscript is submitted, the Managing Editor (or the Editor-in-Chief) briefly checks the manuscript for conformance with the journal’s Focus, Scope, Policies and style requirements and decide whether it is potentially suitable for publication and can be processed for review, or rejected immediately, or returned to the author for improvement and re-submission.

Manuscripts are peer-reviewed by the Editors, Editorial Board members, and/or external experts before final decisions regarding publication are made. The entire editorial workflow is performed in the following steps:


  1. The submitted manuscript is checked in the editorial office whether it is suitable to go through the normal peer review process.
  2. If deemed suitable, the manuscript is sent to 2 reviewers for peer-review. The choice of reviewers depends on the subject of the manuscript, the areas of expertise of the reviewers, and their availability.
  3. Each reviewer will have 2 weeks to provide evaluation of the manuscript. The editor may recommend publication, request minor, moderate or major revision, or provide a written critique of why the manuscript should not be published (rejected).
  4. In case only one reviewer suggest rejection of the manuscript, the latter is subjected to additional evaluation by the third reviewer.
  5. The manuscript will be published in a revised form provided that the authors successfully answer the critics received. The Editor-in-Chief is the final authority on all editorial decisions.