Peer Review Process


  1. The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal via an online system. 

Editor check:

  1. To determine whether the manuscript fits with the aims and scope of the journal; The journal Editor-in-Chief (EIC) will check the papers against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and follows the required format of the journal.
  2. The editor-in-chief checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal, that it is original. If not, and outside the scope of the journal, the paper is rejected without being reviewed.
  3. Once the editor-in-chief approves the initial manuscript screening it is sent to the editorial managing team to revise that the manuscript fits all the guidelines required by the journal and communicates with the author. In the event that the manuscript does NOT conform to the author guidelines, it is sent back to the author to amend.
  4. If it fits the journal scope, the paper is then sent to two reviewers.

Reviewers’ invitations

    1. The Editorial board will select & send invitations to two reviewers based on research specialty, their qualifications and expertise. A double-blind review process is used where both reviewers and the author remain and reviewers are anonymous. This prevents bias.
    2. Selected reviewers may either accept or decline reviewing the paper. If selected reviewers decline reviewing the paper, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.
    3. the author is informed that this process will take 2 weeks. 


  1. After reviewing the paper, it is then submitted to the journal with a recommendation to either accept (with request for either major or minor corrections) or reject it. However, the final decision lies with the Editor.
  2. Then the deputy editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviewers’ decision differs greatly, the paper is sent to another (a third) reviewer in order to get an extra opinion before making a final decision.
  3. The (associate editor) receives the reviewer comments and sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments.
  4. Once the author sends back the comments, they are revised and a final decision is made.
  5. Both the Editor-in-chief and Associate Editor (of the specialty of the manuscript) make the final decision to accept or reject the paper. If the manuscript requires further revision, it is sent again back to the author. If accepted, the author receives an immediate acceptance letter.
  6. In case the paper is accepted, it is sent to production while if rejected or sent back for either major or minor corrections, constructive comments from the reviewers should be forwarded by the editor to help the author improve the article. Also, the reviewers should be contacted by e-mail to inform them about the outcome of their review. Moreover, if the paper is sent to the author for further revision, the reviewers receive a new version of the paper after being revised. In case minor changes are requested, the reviewed paper may be revised by the editor.

Further quality checks

  1. Then the paper will be sent to the type setting team, who will perform further quality checks and prepare the PDF proofs. Then the author will receive an email link to the PDF proofs, along with a query form that addresses any inconsistencies that need decision before publication. 

Publication of manuscript

  1. Once proofs are returned, corrections are made by the type setting team, and final proofs will be sent to the journal’s content Editors for final checks and formatted according to journal style. Once this process is completed, the paper will be published through Early Cites and will be a fully citable, published article with a DOI number. The article can be promoted, downloaded, and referenced.
  2. The manuscript is published. 
  3. All reviewers are given recognition through a thank you letter appreciating their cooperation & enriching the journal value in achieving MSNJ aim.