Peer review is one of the most important characteristic in choosing a journal before submitting your manuscript. You want to receive crucial comments and feedbacks on the work you have done, and the Journal would like to ensure that the papers it publishes are scientifically accurate and beneficial to a greater audience.
As you would see in the Guide for Authors, all manuscripts submitted to LSMB will go through a systematic, single blind peer-review process by qualified reviewers in their respective field of studies.
The Peer Review Procees:
1. The review process starts when the author (s) usually the corresponding author submit the manuscript using LSMB’s Online Journal System. Upon successful submission, the author (s) will receive an Article Submission confirmation.
2. At the Journal’s end, the Managing Editors and the Editorial Office checks through the submission to ensure that all formatting and styles are adhered too. During this time, the Editorial Office may request for additional information including supporting files, images or to improve certain sections.
3. Once the initial checks are completed, the Editor-in-Chief or the Editors appoints a suitable Section Editor to facilitate the review process.
4. The Section Editor accepts the appointment online, and proceed to select reviewers based on their expertise to complete the review. During this stage, the reviewers are required to commit to the set deadlines, raise any other concerns, as well as declare if there are competing interest with the assigned tasks, manuscripts and/or authors.
5. The Section Editor follows-up with reviewers to ensure timely submission of the review report. In general, reviewers are provided 1 week to respond to either accept or decline the review invitation.
6. Once accepted, the reviewer normally has 2 weeks to complete and submit the report online.
7. In addition to the review report, the reviewer is also required to suggest a decision either to accept or decline, or to request for revision or resubmission. Any recommended decisions will need to be justified.
8. The author (s) can monitor these processes online by logging into the Online Journal System using their username and password.
9. Once the Section Editor receives a minimum of two reports from 2 independent reviewers, the Section Editor summarizes the findings and proposes a decision.
10. Based on the decision by the Section Editor, the Editorial Office and the Managing Editor may requests additional input from the Editor-in-Chief or Senior Editors before recording a decision.
11. This decision will then be conveyed to the author (s).
12. At this stage, the author (s) will know if their paper is accepted, or declined for publication. Constructive reasons may be provided to allow author (s) rationalize the decision. However, most of the manuscripts will fall in the category of requiring revisions.
13. The Section Editor will suggest a deadline for the authors to submit the revised manuscript before a final decision can be made to accept the manuscript for publication. The review process ends here.
14. Upon acceptance, the manuscript is then transferred to the copyediting team to prepare the manuscript for eventual online publication. The Editorial Office will be working closely with the corresponding author who will function as the main channel between all authors and the Editorial Office of the Journal.