Peer Review Process
The peer review process for an academic journal is a critical step in ensuring the quality and validity of research articles before they are published. Below is a step-by-step description of peer review process at Data Intelligence in Genetics:
Authors submit their research manuscripts to the journal through an online submission system. The submission typically includes the manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary materials, author information, and a cover letter.
To submit a new manuscript, you must first log in to your account, and if you do not have an account, you must create an account through this link.
The submitted manuscript must be prepared according to the authors' guide.
Upon submission, the journal's editorial office conducts an initial screening to ensure that the manuscript complies with the journal's guidelines, formatting, and scope.
Manuscripts that do not meet these initial requirements may be desk-rejected and not sent out for peer review. Authors are informed of the rejection and, if applicable, reasons for it.
3.1. If the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editor-in-chief or an associate editor assigns an academic editor (also known as a handling editor) to oversee the peer review process.
3.2. The assigned editor evaluates the manuscript's suitability for the journal and selects potential peer reviewers based on their expertise in the subject matter.
Peer Reviewer Invitation
4.1. The editor contacts potential peer reviewers and invites them to assess the manuscript. Peer reviewers are typically experts in the field who remain anonymous to the authors.
4.2. Peer reviewers may accept or decline the invitation based on their availability, expertise, or potential conflicts of interest.
5.1. Peer reviewers who accept the invitation conduct a thorough review of the manuscript. They assess the research for its scientific soundness, methodology, originality, significance, and adherence to ethical and academic standards.
5.2. Reviewers provide detailed feedback and recommendations to the editor, and they may recommend acceptance, revision, major revision, or rejection.
Based on the feedback from peer reviewers and their own evaluation, the assigned editor makes a decision regarding the manuscript:
- Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without major revisions.
- Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor revisions to address specific concerns raised by the reviewers.
- Major Revision: Significant revisions and further review are needed before a final decision can be made.
- Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.
7.1. If revisions are required, authors receive a decision letter that includes feedback from the reviewers and the editor.
7.2. Authors revise their manuscript, addressing all reviewers' comments and concerns, and submit a revised version within a specified timeframe.
Re-review (if necessary)
If major revisions were requested, the manuscript is often sent back to the original peer reviewers for re-review to ensure that the revisions adequately address the concerns.
The editor makes a final decision based on the revised manuscript and the feedback from the original reviewers or new reviewers (if necessary).
Acceptance and Publication
10.1. If the manuscript is accepted, it moves to the production and publication phase, where it undergoes copyediting, typesetting, and formatting.
10.2. Once finalized, the article is published in the journal, typically both online and in print, depending on the journal's distribution methods.
After publication, the article is available for the scientific community to read and cite. Researchers may provide feedback or critiques in the form of letters to the editor or comments.