At MSI Publishers, we uphold a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality and integrity of the research we publish. This process is designed to provide constructive feedback to authors and maintain the high standards of scientific discourse. Below is an overview of our peer review process.

1. Submission
  • Authors submit their manuscripts through our online submission system. Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial review to assess the manuscript’s adherence to our guidelines and overall suitability for publication.
2. Initial Assessment
  • The editorial team performs an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript aligns with the scope of the journal and meets basic quality standards. If the manuscript does not meet these criteria, it may be returned to the authors without proceeding to peer review.
3. Selection of Reviewers
  • If the manuscript passes the initial assessment, the editor selects qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Typically, two to four reviewers are chosen to provide a balanced evaluation of the work.
4. Peer Review
  • Reviewers are given a specific timeframe to evaluate the manuscript. They assess the work based on criteria such as originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and adherence to ethical standards.
  • Reviewers provide detailed feedback and recommendations, which may include suggestions for improvement, requests for additional experiments or data, or identification of any ethical concerns.
5. Review Outcomes
  • After the reviewers complete their evaluations, the editor considers all feedback and makes a decision regarding the manuscript. The possible outcomes include:
    • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without changes.
    • Minor Revisions: The manuscript can be accepted pending minor changes, which the authors must address before publication.
    • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant changes before it can be reconsidered for publication. Authors will have the opportunity to revise and resubmit.
    • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form.
6. Author Revisions
  • If revisions are requested, authors are provided with the reviewers’ comments and feedback. They must revise their manuscript accordingly and resubmit it within a specified timeframe. Authors should include a detailed response to each comment to explain how they addressed the feedback.
7. Final Decision
  • Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the editor may send it back to the original reviewers for further evaluation or may make a decision based on the revisions. The final decision will be communicated to the authors.
8. Publication
  • Upon acceptance, the manuscript will undergo copyediting and typesetting before being published in the journal. Authors will receive proofs to review prior to final publication.