All journals published by Compuscript operate on the established basis of full and transparent peer review. All submitted research articles to any titles are subject to the highest standards of international peer review, ensuring rigorous evaluation and quality:
- At least two suitably qualified experts review each manuscript.
- The journal’s Editor-in-Chief makes all publication decisions based on the reviews provided.
- International Editorial Board Members assist the Editor-in-Chief in decision-making on specific submissions, offering insight, advice, and guidance.
- Managing Editors and Editorial Assistants provide administrative support for the review process, upholding the integrity of peer review while ensuring rapid turnaround and maximum efficiency for all stakeholders, including authors, reviewers, and editors.
- Referees’ identities are not disclosed to authors or other reviewers unless a referee voluntarily signs their comments. Our preference is for referees to remain anonymous throughout and beyond the review process.
- Compuscript uses the ScholarOne Thomson Reuters Manuscript tracking system to support its peer review processes. This system has a long, successful track record with major journals and publishers globally.
- Compuscript fully subscribes to the COPE code of conduct and best practices for journal editors, ensuring accountability for everything published. Readers are always informed about how the research is funded, and our relationships with authors, reviewers, and editorial board members are influenced by COPE best practice guidelines.
Reviewers primarily evaluate the originality, validity, and importance of the manuscripts, providing detailed and evidence-based comments to help editors make publication decisions (accept, revise, or reject) and assist authors in making improvements. The following points are considered during the review process:
- Suitability and Originality: Is the manuscript suitable for the journal? Is it original and important? The topic should be within the scope of the journal and of interest to readers. Reviewers judge the originality and importance of the manuscript.
- Study Design: Is the study design appropriate and complete? Reviewers should point out any issues with inclusion and exclusion criteria, blinding, sampling, interventions, baselines, end points, and follow-up, ensuring sufficient detail for replication.
- Results and Conclusions: Are the results and conclusions well supported? Reviewers should highlight any incomplete, insufficient, or erroneous data that may affect the results and conclusions.
- Statistical Analysis: Are there any problems with the statistics? The statistics reviewer must ensure there are no flaws or errors in the statistical methods and analyses.
- Ethical Considerations: Are there any ethical issues? Authors should provide ethical approval from an appropriate ethical committee and informed consent from subjects for studies involving humans. Reviewers should question any undisclosed conflicts of interest.
- Confidentiality: Reviewers must respect and observe the confidentiality of the manuscript.
