Editorial Process

1. Submission

The author will receive a tracking number (Manuscript ID) following a submission.


2. Preliminary Check

All submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the journal’s editorial office for compliance with guidelines for preparation of articles, the journal’s scope, standard guidelines, quality, novelty, and adherence to ethical issues. Articles that do not comply with the guidelines will be sent back to the authors.


3. Plagiarism Check

Plagiarism is a serious issue in the world of academic publishing. Plagiarism is not only taking someone else’s work and using it as your own: there are different circumstances under which reproduced content can be considered “plagiarized”. We use a tool called iThenticate to scan every submission before peer review.


4. Peer-review

Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. BRI operates double-blind peer review.

Authors can recommend two potential reviewers who could be called upon to review the manuscript. Recommended reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Please be aware of any conflicts of interest when recommending reviewers. Examples of conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to):

• The reviewer should have no prior knowledge of the submission.

• The reviewer should not have recently collaborated with any of the authors.

• Reviewer nominees from the same institution as any of the authors are not permitted.

• You will also be asked to nominate peers who you do not wish to review your manuscript (opposed reviewers).

Please note that the Editors are not obliged to invite/reject any recommended/opposed reviewers to review submitted manuscripts. However, the editorial team will endeavor to respect requests for opposed reviewers as long as these requests do not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.

Journal editors will check to make sure there are no conflicts of interest before contacting reviewers, and will not consider those with competing interests. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest before reviewing any submitted manuscript.


5. Editor Decision and Revision

In cases where only minor revisions are recommended, the author is usually requested to revise the paper before referring to the external editor. Articles may or may not be sent to reviewers after author revision, dependent on whether the reviewer requested to see the revised version and the wishes of the Academic editor. Apart from in exceptional circumstances, we allow a maximum of two rounds of major revision per manuscript. The in-house editor will communicate the decision of the academic editor, which will be one of the following:

Accept after Minor Revisions:

The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given seven days for minor revisions.

Reconsider after Major Revisions:

The acceptance of the manuscript will depend on the revisions made to the manuscript. Authors need to provide a point by point response or a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a suitable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.

Reject and Encourage Resubmission:

If additional experiments are needed to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors will be encouraged to re-submit the paper once further experiments have been conducted.

Reject:

The article has serious flaws, and/or makes no original significant contribution. No offer of resubmission to the journal will be provided.

All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.

Author Appeals

Authors may appeal a rejection judgement by sending an e-mail to the journal’s Editorial Office. The appeal must provide a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments. The Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or Editorial Board member. The Editor being consulted will subsequently be asked to provide an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.


The BRI editorial process.


6. Production

BRI carries out production on all manuscripts, including language editing, copy editing, and conversion to XML. Language editing is carried out by professional English editing editors.

The submitted, accepted and published dates will be shown in the PDF and HTML files of the published articles, a digital object identifier (DOI) number will also be assigned for each published article. The submitted date is the date on which the editors received the original (or if previously rejected, the resubmitted) manuscript. The accepted date is when the editor sends the acceptance letter. The published date is the earliest date that the final version-of-record is made available on the publisher's website.


7. Editorial Independence

Editorial independence dictates that decision to accept or reject a manuscript is based on the scientific merit of the article but not to any other relations for example pressure from the publisher to the journal editor. This means that Editor is independent in his/her decision and will not be under pressure of any influential body or organization.

Our editorial policy is consistent with the principles of editorial independence presented by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).


8. Process for in-House Submissions

BRI requires that editorial staff or editors not be involved in processing their own academic work. The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board. Submissions will be assigned to at least two independent outside reviewers. The submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process. Decisions will be made by other Editorial Board Members who do not have a conflict of interest with the author.

Guest Editors should not hold conflicts of interest with authors whose work they are assessing (e.g., from the same institution or collaborate closely). In this case, the Editor-in-Chief or a suitable Editorial Board member will make final acceptance decisions for submitted papers.

This section is required for all papers. If there are no interests to declare, please use the following wording: "Given his/her role as [Guest] Editor [in Chief], <NAME of Editor> had no involvement in the peer-review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer-review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to <NAME of delegated editor>".


9. Publishing Standards and Guidelines

BRI follow the following guidelines and standards for its journals:

ICMJE: Medically related BRI journals follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The guidelines comprehensively cover all aspects of editing, from how the journal is managed to details about peer review and handling complaints. The majority of the recommendations are not specific to medical journals and are followed by all BRI journals.

The CONSORT statement covers reporting of randomized, controlled trials. We encourage authors to verify their work against the checklist and flow diagram and upload them with their submission.

PRISMA covers systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventional studies and MOOSE for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. Authors are recommended to complete the checklist and flow diagram and include it with their submission.

ARRIVE contains guidelines for reporting in vivo experiments. Authors are recommended to verify their work against the checklist and include it with their submission.

STROBE guidelines cover reporting of observational studies. Also, for diagnostic studies, authors are encouraged to use STARD guideline.

CARE guidelines (for CAse REports) was developed by an international group of experts to support an increase in the accuracy, transparency, and usefulness of case reports. View and download the CARE checklist here.

Submission of a manuscript to a Frontiers in Bioscience journals implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.


10. Ethical Standards

BRI follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.

Our journals follow COPE’s procedures for dealing with potentially unethical behavior by authors, reviewers or editors. All BRI editorial staff are trained in how to detect and respond to potential ethical problems.

More information about our publishing ethics policy.