Double-blind Peer review (Roles of Editors and Reviewers):
After being received, each manuscript is primarily evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief.
- If the manuscript is not well-prepared as per Disease and Clinical Medicine (DCM) instructions, the manuscript is sent back to the corresponding author.
- If the content is not satisfactory, insufficient, or does not match the scopes of Disease and Clinical Medicine (DCM), the manuscript is rejected instantly.
- On passing the preliminary screening, the manuscript is sent to at least two expert peer reviewers.
A reviewer invitation from Disease and Clinical Medicine (DCM) is sent out by e-mail from the journal management system. Only the title and abstract of the manuscript are included in the invitation e-mail. After accepting the invitation, the reviewer gets full access to the entire manuscript. The identities of the reviewers are kept confidential.
After completion of the peer-review process and necessary revisions are done by the author, the revised manuscript is sent to the section editor(s) for critical checking and seeking the primary comments whether the manuscript can be accepted. The decision on a manuscript is finally made by the Editor-in-Chief considering the comments from the section editor and expert reviewers.
The decision may be any one of the following:
Accept (with or without editorial revision)
Suggest the authors for more revision
Reject the possibility of resubmission: The authors are informed that further work might justify a resubmit.
Reject, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance, or major technical and/or interpretational problem.
Peer-review of an article is expected to be completed within 4 weeks. The decision by the Editor-in-Chief is given in approximately 5 weeks.
N.B. If the corresponding author does not submit the revised version within 3 weeks, the article will be considered as rejected and the article metadata will be deleted from the system.
Last updated on Sep 26, 2020