Peer Review Process
| Post date: 2020/10/12 |
Peer Review Process
The journal of Research in Sport Medicine and Technology (RSMT) is committed to the highest standards of double-blind peer-review. The journal of Research in Sport Medicine and Technology (RSMT) follows the policies and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and abides by its Code of Conduct in dealing with potential cases of misconduct.
All manuscripts are subject to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality of their underlying research methodology and argument. After submitting the manuscript to the author(s) in the journal management system, the manuscript will primarily be studied based on publishing experts (maximum a week). Please follow the Instructions to Authors carefully to expedite the manuscript as precise as codification guidelines in the system and then submit it. If it is accepted in the first stage, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor-in-chief.
Upon receipt of the manuscript, the corresponding author is notified and will receive the number under which the manuscript has been registered, and the name and e-mail address of the scientific editor who will handle it. From this point onwards, authors should communicate with the editor-in-chief only about the progress of the reviewing process. The manuscript will be sent to at least two referees, and a reply may be expected at the earliest four weeks after submission. Manuscripts can be accepted, with minor or major revisions, or rejected. If the decision is ‘revision’, the authors are requested to take the remarks of the referees and editors into account. A second reviewing process can follow. Upon final acceptance, the authors provide a final version of the manuscript inappropriate file formats (not a PDF) (text as a WORD doc. and tables as Excel file) and send these to the editor-in-chief. The authors will then be notified when the paper will be published. Only one galley proof will be sent as a PDF file to the corresponding author. This proof must be carefully corrected and sent back within two working days.
A weekly e-mail will be submitted to the reviewers, and the manuscript will be given back due to lack of manuscript review after one month, then it will be sent to another reviewer. Based on the level of the requested modifications, the viewpoints of reviewers, and the accuracy and precision of modifications done by authors, being accepted in this publication takes about 24 weeks (in case of final approval by reviewers). Secretary specialist and scientific committee based on relevant content and subject. This stage will usually take two months. After the third phase acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to two reviewers, and then the review process of the manuscript is as follows:
The journal of Research in Sport Medicine and Technology (RSMT) is committed to the highest standards of double-blind peer-review. The journal of Research in Sport Medicine and Technology (RSMT) follows the policies and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and abides by its Code of Conduct in dealing with potential cases of misconduct.
All manuscripts are subject to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality of their underlying research methodology and argument. After submitting the manuscript to the author(s) in the journal management system, the manuscript will primarily be studied based on publishing experts (maximum a week). Please follow the Instructions to Authors carefully to expedite the manuscript as precise as codification guidelines in the system and then submit it. If it is accepted in the first stage, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor-in-chief.
Upon receipt of the manuscript, the corresponding author is notified and will receive the number under which the manuscript has been registered, and the name and e-mail address of the scientific editor who will handle it. From this point onwards, authors should communicate with the editor-in-chief only about the progress of the reviewing process. The manuscript will be sent to at least two referees, and a reply may be expected at the earliest four weeks after submission. Manuscripts can be accepted, with minor or major revisions, or rejected. If the decision is ‘revision’, the authors are requested to take the remarks of the referees and editors into account. A second reviewing process can follow. Upon final acceptance, the authors provide a final version of the manuscript inappropriate file formats (not a PDF) (text as a WORD doc. and tables as Excel file) and send these to the editor-in-chief. The authors will then be notified when the paper will be published. Only one galley proof will be sent as a PDF file to the corresponding author. This proof must be carefully corrected and sent back within two working days.
A weekly e-mail will be submitted to the reviewers, and the manuscript will be given back due to lack of manuscript review after one month, then it will be sent to another reviewer. Based on the level of the requested modifications, the viewpoints of reviewers, and the accuracy and precision of modifications done by authors, being accepted in this publication takes about 24 weeks (in case of final approval by reviewers). Secretary specialist and scientific committee based on relevant content and subject. This stage will usually take two months. After the third phase acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to two reviewers, and then the review process of the manuscript is as follows:
- If two reviewers reject a manuscript, it will be disapproved;
- If the opinion of the two reviews is the total revision of the manuscript, the manuscript will be submitted to the author for revision;
- If a reviewer's opinion is a general revision and the second one rejects the manuscript, the essay will be submitted to the third reviewer, and according to his/her idea relevant to the first and second item, the decision will be made.
- When the author modified the manuscript and submitted it, the manuscript would be given to another reviewer for comparative assessment.
- If the opinion of the two reviews is the total revision of the manuscript, the manuscript will be submitted to the author for revision;
- If a reviewer's opinion is a general revision and the second one rejects the manuscript, the essay will be submitted to the third reviewer, and according to his/her idea relevant to the first and second item, the decision will be made.
- When the author modified the manuscript and submitted it, the manuscript would be given to another reviewer for comparative assessment.
View: 2000 Time(s) | Print: 474 Time(s) | Email: 0 Time(s) |
0 Comment(s)
