The following is the editorial workflow that every manuscript submitted to the eMedical Research undergoes during the course of the peer-review process.
Once a manuscript is submitted for publication in eMedical Research, all the authors will be notified about the submission. Later the manuscript is scrutinized by the journal’s editorial office to ensure that it is appropriate to subject the manuscript to peer review process. Based on the subject of manuscript an editorial board member will be invited to take on the assignment to evaluate the manuscript.
If the Editor determined that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to go through the normal peer review process, or if the subject of the manuscript is not appropriate to the journal’s scope, then the manuscript will be rejected for publication with no further processing.
If the Editorial board member finds that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, they should assign the manuscript to 2 to 4 external reviewers whose research interest falls in the subject as of submitted manuscript.
Based on the recommendations from reviewers, the editor can make one of the following decisions
If the decision of editor is “Minor revision” or “Major revision”, then we will notify the corresponding author about the suggestions of editor. The authors will then have time to improve the manuscript as per the suggestions and recommendations from reviewers. Once the revised version is submitted the Editor-in-Chief or Subject Chief will decide if further review process is required or not.
The manuscript will be published online only after the approval of Editor-in-Chief or Section Chief.
The peer-review process at eMedical Research Publications is single blinded, i.e., the reviewers are aware of who the authors of the manuscript are, but the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer-reviewers are.