The maintenance of the quality of the academic journals is Peer Review. During the practice of peer review, the abstract is analyzed from all perspectives by the experts.

1. Abstract Submission

The research content is submitted through email or online system

2. Role of Editorial Office

The research content is supervised and thoroughly checked by the team of Editorial Board to confirm that the content is according to the needs of journal. Through plagiarism scanner, it is also ensured that the content does not have any similarity with any other work.

3. Evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief

The content is rechecked by the editor-in-Chief to see the quality and uniqueness of the content. If this thing lacks, the content will be rejected and wouldn’t be processed further.

4. Abstract is sent for peer review

The abstract is sent to the section editor who handles the peer review. Section editor could also serve himself/herself as a peer review and may invite a colleague as well to review.

5. Selection of reviewers

The reviewers are the experts in the domain of the research. Minimum of 2 reviewers are selected by sending the invitations. The acceptance or rejection of invitation depends upon the expert.  Double blind review process is followed in which both the author and the reviewer are unknown to each other.

6. Peer review

The abstract could be reviewed numerous times by the reviewer. The research content can be rejected even after the first review if the impression of the content is not according to the author or there is some major challenge in the content. In case, the content is appropriate, the reviewer will read the abstract again to create a detailed review over the content. Then, the reviewer will submit the review with the opinion of getting it published or reject it.  The reviewer can also ask for a final reconsideration before the abstract gets published.

7. Consideration of reviews

The recommendations and opinions given by the reviewer are considered by the editor who is handling the journal. There can be a chance of considering another reviewer to get another opinion if the reviews differ broadly.

8. Transmission of the decision

The editor (or the team) informs the author on the decision through mail along with the appropriate comments of the reviewer.

9. Final procedure

The abstract is sent for publication if it is accepted. If there are some minor changes, the handling editor handles it himself/ herself. The comments of the reviewer are also sent to the author so that the author can make changes according to the reviews. If according to the reviews, a lot of changes are required then a new copy is expected by the reviewer for second review of the same abstract.