Peer Review Process

---

Ansis Publications ensures the integrity, quality, and rigor of published research through a transparent and ethical peer review process. Every manuscript undergoes thorough evaluation to assess originality, scientific accuracy, and contribution to the field.

Fig 1: Peer Review Process

Submission Screening

• All manuscripts are submitted via our in-house submission system, Ansis ManuscriptHub.
• The Editorial Office verifies compliance with journal guidelines, manuscript completeness, and ethical standards.
• Plagiarism detection software (iThenticate / Crossref Similarity Check) is used to ensure originality.
• Initial screening evaluates:
  • Alignment with the journal’s scope
  • Scientific merit and relevance
  • Adherence to journal instructions
  • Previous publication status

Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be rejected without peer review.

Editorial Assessment

• The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor assesses the manuscript’s suitability for peer review.
• Manuscripts may be returned if they do not meet the journal’s standards or scope.

Peer Review

• Double-Blind Review:
  • Reviewers do not know authors’ identities.
  • Authors do not know reviewers’ identities.
• Reviewers are selected based on expertise, independence, and absence of conflicts of interest.
• Reviewers evaluate manuscripts for:
• Originality and novelty
• Scientific quality and methodology
• Clarity, coherence, and presentation
• Ethical compliance and adherence to COPE / OASPA guidelines
• Based on evaluations, possible reviewer recommendations include:
  • Acceptance
  • Minor revisions
  • Major revisions / Revise and resubmit
  • Decline with option to resubmit
  • Decline

Decision Making

• A minimum of two completed reviews is required before the Handling Editor makes a recommendation.
• The Editor-in-Chief reviews the recommendation and communicates the final decision to the author.
• Decisions may include:
  • Acceptance
  • Conditional acceptance requiring revisions
  • Rejection due to insufficient quality, inappropriate subject matter, or inaccuracies

Revisions and Final Evaluation

• Authors submit revised manuscripts addressing reviewers’ and editors’ comments.
• Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review before a final decision.
• Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments to guide revisions.

Transparency, Ethics, and Appeals

• Reviewers and editors follow COPE and OASPA ethical guidelines.
• Conflicts of interest must be disclosed and appropriately managed.
• Appeals or disputes related to the review process are handled via the journal’s Appeals and Complaints Process.

Post-Peer Review

• Accepted manuscripts proceed to production, copyediting, and publication.
• All manuscripts undergo final quality checks before online publication.

Complaints

• Authors experiencing challenges during submission, review, or publication may contact help@ansispublications.com.
• Complaints are handled confidentially and may be escalated to the Editorial Board if required.
• All complaints are managed according to COPE guidelines to ensure fairness, transparency, and ethical resolution.