Publishing with IMEFM: What the submission process involves
All journal articles in IMEFM go through a double blind review process, this means if a submission is conditionally accepted, it will go through several reviewer processes. This is the process in IMEFM, and how long it takes:Process
Assign to reviewer
Usually within 14 days
Reviewers work to a 30 day target, however as a paper is reviewed by 2 people this can be 60 days if the second reviewer takes longer to review
If the reviewer suggests minor or major amendments the editor asks the author to make those suggested amendments?
This may take up to 30 to 60 days, the paper will go back to reviewers for checking once changes made
How long does the process take?
If a paper goes through several review stages, the process can take up to 200 days (e.g. 7 months) before a paper is ready to be accepted
We also have author proofs
Authors will have the opportunity to check their article proofs before publication, this usually takes place approximately 6 weeks after acceptance. The author has 10 days to provide feedback to our content editing team.
Once a paper has been formally accepted and copy right form returned?
We aim to publish within 32 days as an Early Cited document on our website
How long in total is the process?
Between 8 to 15 months
1. Submission of Paper
The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal via Scholar-One Manuscripts.
2. Editorial Office Assessment
The Editorial Office checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations.
3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)
The EIC checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.
4. In IMEFM an EIC can Assign to an Associate Editor (AE) to handle
Conditionally accepted manuscripts will then be passed to Associate Editors handle the peer review. An EIC may also handle this process.
5. Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required 2 acceptance recommendations are obtained.
6. Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.
7. Review is Conducted
The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
8. Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
9. The Decision is Communicated
The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments.