Peer Review Process

Peer-Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Novatio undergo a rigorous screening and review process to ensure that they fit into the journal's scope and are of sufficient academic quality and novelty to appeal to Novatio readership. Novatio employs a double-blind peer review, in which both author(s) and reviewers’ identities are concealed from each other.

Initial Screening

A newly submitted manuscript will be screened by the Editor-in-Chief for its conformity to Novatio scope and basic submission requirements.

Peer-Review

If the manuscript passes the initial screening stage, it will be assigned to a handling editor, who will then send it to at least two experts in the relevant field to undergo a double-blind peer-review. Manuscripts that fail to pass the initial screening will be rejected without further review.

First Decision

A decision on a peer-reviewed manuscript will only be made upon the receipt of at least two review reports. In cases where reports differ significantly, the handling editor will invite an additional reviewer to get a third opinion before making a decision. At this stage, a manuscript can either be rejected, asked for revisions (minor or major), accepted as is, or (if significant changes to the language or content are required) recommended for resubmission for a second review process. If it is accepted, the manuscript will be returned to the submitting author for formatting. The final decision to accept the manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the recommendation of the handling editor and following approval by the board of editors.

Revision Stage

A manuscript that requires revisions will be returned to the submitting author, who will have up to three weeks to format and revise the manuscript, following which it will be reviewed by the handling editor. The handling editor will determine whether the changes are adequate and appropriate, as well as whether the author(s) sufficiently responded to the reviewers' comments and suggestions. If the revisions are deemed to be inadequate, this cycle will be repeated (the manuscript will be returned to the submitting author once more for further revision).

Final Decision

At this stage, the revised manuscript will either be accepted or rejected. This decision depends on whether the handling editor finds the manuscript to have been improved to a level worthy of publication. If the author(s) are unable to make the required changes or have done so to a degree below Novatio standards, the manuscript will be rejected.

Additional Details on the Review Process

Below are further clarifications on the Novatio review process, complementing the steps above. Novatio follows a rigorous and transparent approach to ensure the quality and credibility of the published articles, adopting a double-blind (double-anonymous) peer-review procedure, where identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the process.

Submission and Initial Evaluation

All manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to assess their suitability and compliance with the journal’s scope and guidelines. Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation are assigned a unique identification number for tracking and further processing.

Double-Blind Review

To maintain objectivity and fairness in the evaluation process, Novatio ensures that both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed from each other. This policy helps minimize potential biases and maintains the integrity of the peer-review process.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Scientific quality and rigor
  • Originality and novelty
  • Relevance to Novatio’s scope
  • Clarity of presentation and argumentation
  • Adherence to ethical guidelines

They are encouraged to provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement to help authors enhance the overall quality of their work.

Review Duration

Novatio is committed to providing timely feedback. Reviewers are typically given a specific timeframe to complete their evaluations. Authors will be informed of the estimated duration of the review process during the initial submission or upon request for revisions.

Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding the publication of a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief or designated members of the Editorial Board. This decision is made after a thorough consideration of reviewers’ comments, originality of the research, alignment with Novatio’s scope, and ethical compliance.

Confidentiality

Novatio maintains strict confidentiality throughout the review process. Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and their contents as confidential. Any distribution, discussion, or use of these materials beyond the scope of the review process is strictly prohibited.

Review Process Improvement

To continually enhance the efficacy and fairness of the review mechanism, Novatio welcomes feedback and suggestions from authors, reviewers, and readers. Insights into improving the review timeline, transparency, and reviewer guidance are regularly considered to refine the journal’s editorial policies.

Contact

For any inquiries or questions related to the review process, please contact the editorial team at the journal@idscipub.com