Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Peer review is a critical component of our publication cycle at Ansis Publications. Every manuscript submitted undergoes thorough peer review conducted by members of our Editorial Board and blind reviews by two reviewers. The following outlines the editorial workflow through which all submitted manuscripts progress.
Initial Evaluation
Ansis Publications utilizes its in-house Manuscript Tracking System, Ansis Manager. to process all manuscripts. Upon receipt, our Editorial Office conducts a plagiarism check using iThenticate software and assesses the manuscript for suitability for peer review. Therefore, authors are encouraged to ensure their manuscripts are well-written and of high quality. During the initial screening process, our Editorial Office primarily evaluates the following:
- Is the manuscript aligned with the journal’s scope?
- Is the content of the manuscript sufficiently compelling to warrant a review?
- Does the manuscript adhere to the journal’s Instructions for Authors?
- Has the manuscript been previously submitted or published elsewhere?
If the manuscript does not meet the journal's criteria, it is promptly rejected.
Peer Review
Once manuscripts pass the initial screening, they are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief, who then assigns them to a Handling Editor. The handling editor will distribute the manuscript to a minimum of 3 reviewers for peer review. Reviewers submit their evaluations and recommendations, which may result in one of the following actions:
- Acceptance
- Minor revisions required
- Major revisions required
- Decline with the option to resubmit
- Decline
We employ a double-blinded peer-review process where the identities of both reviewers and authors are concealed. Our journals recognize and appreciate the contributions of reviewers, whose invaluable efforts make journal publication possible. We are committed to following the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). and provide these guidelines to our reviewers to ensure rigorous ethical standards in evaluation.
Final Decision
For the handling editor to make a recommendation on the manuscript, a minimum of two completed reviews is necessary. Once reviewers have submitted their comments, the handling editor is notified and subsequently shares their recommendations with the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief then communicates the final decision to the author.
If the manuscript is conditionally accepted, authors will need to revise their manuscript based on the Editor’s feedback and submit the revised version for further evaluation.
Our Editorial Workflow empowers editors to reject manuscripts for reasons such as inappropriate subject matter, insufficient quality, or inaccuracies in results. To ensure rigorous and unbiased peer review, we engage reviewers from diverse geographical locations worldwide.
Complaints
Authors experiencing any challenges during the publication process can submit their complaints to help@ansispublications.com. The Editorial Office will handle complaints related to journal policies and procedures and may escalate them to the appropriate Editorial Board as needed.