Peer Review Process

The editorial staff will first evaluate manuscripts submitted to the IJS journal to assess their suitability with the journal's aims and scope. Those manuscripts that inappropriate to the journal criteria will be rejected with an explanation of the reasons behind a desk-reject decision without any further external review.

The potential articles will be sent to double-blind reviewed by at least two or more expert reviewers who will give valuable comments to improve the manuscript's contents. Reviewers are given a month to provide a detailed report on the manuscripts with their recommended decision, which can either be "accept," "minor revision," "major revision," or "reject." When a "revise" decision is made, for "minor revision," authors are provided one month, and for the "major revision," authors are provided two months to undertake revisions. When revised papers are submitted, the Managing Editor reads the article and the rejoinder and makes a final decision in the case of minor revisions. In the case of a major revision, resubmitted papers are again assigned to reviewers, and the editorial decision proceeds from there.

The final decision on whether or not to publish the articles rest solely with The Editor-in-Chief, who makes the editorial decision keeps in the scopes and aims of the journal. The review process:

• The Authors submit the manuscript
• Editor evaluation (some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process)
• Double-Blind review process ("accept", "minor revision", "major revision", or "reject")
• Sent to the author for further revision
• Resubmitted to the IJS after revision
• Editor Decision
• Confirmation to the authors
• Published