Instructions for Authors

Shortcuts

Submission Checklist

Please:

  1. Read the Aims & Scope to gain an overview and assess if your manuscript is suitable for this journal;
  2. Use the Microsoft Word template or LaTeX template or Free Format Submission to prepare your manuscript;
  3. Make sure that issues about publication ethics, research ethics, copyright, authorship, figure formats, data and references format have been appropriately considered;
  4. Ensure that all authors have approved the content of the submitted manuscript.
  5.  

Manuscript Submission Overview

Types of Publications

Cancer cell research publishes the highest quality of Research Articles, Reviews, Perspectives and Editorials related to the care of patients with cancer such as clinical trials. Cancers adopts the WHO’s definition of Clinical Trial: “Any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes”. We only publish Clinical Trials that are already registered at Primary Registries recommended by the WHO.

Manuscripts submitted to  Cancer cell research should neither be published previously nor be under consideration for publication in another journal. The main article types are as follows:

Submission Process

Manuscripts for Cancer cell research should be submitted online at https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/advinccr. The submitting author, who is generally the corresponding author, is responsible for the manuscript during the submission and peer-review process. The submitting author must ensure that all eligible co-authors have been included in the author list and that they have all read and approved the submitted version of the manuscript. To submit your manuscript, register and log in to the submission. All co-authors can see the manuscript details in the submission system, if they register and log in using the e-mail address provided during manuscript submission.

Accepted File Formats

Authors are encouraged to use the Microsoft Word template to prepare their manuscript. Using the template file will substantially shorten the time to complete copy-editing and publication of accepted manuscripts. The total amount of data for all files must not exceed 120 MB. If this is a problem, please contact the Editorial Office CCR.Accepted file formats are:

Disclaimer: Usage of these templates is exclusively intended for submission to the journal for peer-review, and strictly limited to this purpose and it cannot be used for posting online on preprint servers or other websites.

Free Format Submission

Cancer cell research now accepts free format submission:

Cover Letter

A cover letter must be included with each manuscript submission. It should be concise and explain why the content of the paper is significant, placing the findings in the context of existing work. It should explain why the manuscript fits the scope of the journal.

Any prior submissions of the manuscript to Advancesin journals must be acknowledged. If this is the case, it is strongly recommended that the previous manuscript ID is provided in the submission system, which will ease your current submission process. The names of proposed and excluded reviewers should be provided in the submission system, not in the cover letter.

All cover letters are required to include the statements:

Author Biography

Authors are encouraged to add a biography (maximum 150 words) to the submission. This should be a single paragraph and should contain the following points:

  1. Authors’full names followed by current positions;
  2. Education background including institution information and year of graduation ;
  3. Work experience;
  4. Current and previous research interests;
  5. Memberships of professional societies and awards received.

 

Manuscript Preparation

General Considerations

[Return to top]

Front Matter

These sections should appear in all manuscript types

Research Manuscript Sections

[Return to top]

Back Matter

In the text, reference numbers should be placed in square brackets [ ], and placed before the punctuation; for example [1], [1–3] or [1,3]. For embedded citations in the text with pagination, use both parentheses and brackets to indicate the reference number and page numbers; for example [5] (p. 10). or [6] (pp. 101–105).

The reference list should include the full title, as recommended by the ACS style guide. Style files and Zotero are available.

References should be described as follows, depending on the type of work:

  • Journal Articles:
    1. Author 1 AB, Author 2 CD, Author 3 EF, et al. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name, Year, Volume, page range.
  • Books and Book Chapters:
    2. Author 1 A, Author 2 B. Book Title, 3rd ed.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; pp. 154–196.
    3. Author 1 A, Author 2 B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; Volume 3, pp. 154–196.
  • Unpublished materials intended for publication:
    4. Author 1 AB, Author 2 C. Title of Unpublished Work (optional). Correspondence Affiliation, City, State, Country. year, status (manuscript in preparation; to be submitted).
    5. Author 1 AB, Author 2 C. Title of Unpublished Work. Abbreviated Journal Name year, phrase indicating stage of publication (submitted; accepted; in press).
  • Unpublished materials not intended for publication:
    6. Author 1 AB. (Affiliation, City, State, Country); Author 2, C. (Affiliation, City, State, Country). Phase describing the material, year. (phase: Personal communication; Private communication; Unpublished work; etc.)
  • Conference Proceedings:
    7. Author 1 AB, Author 2 CD, Author 3 EF. Title of Presentation. In Title of the Collected Work (if available), Proceedings of the Name of the Conference, Location of Conference, Country, Date of Conference; Editor 1, Editor 2, Eds. (if available); Publisher: City, Country, Year (if available); Abstract Number (optional), Pagination (optional).
  • Thesis:
    8. Author 1 AB. Title of Thesis. Level of Thesis, Degree-Granting University, Location of University, Date of Completion.
  • Websites:
    9. Title of Site. Available online: URL (accessed on Day Month Year).
    Unlike published works, websites may change over time or disappear, so we encourage you create an archive of the cited website using a service such as WebCite. Archived websites should be cited using the link provided as follows:
    10. Title of Site. URL (archived on Day Month Year).

    • [Return to top]

    Preparing Figures, Schemes and Tables

    [Return to top]

    Original Images for Blots and Gels Requirements

    For the main text, please ensure that:

    In order to ensure the integrity and scientific validity of blots (including, but not limited to, Western blots) and the reporting of gel data, original, uncropped and unadjusted images should be uploaded as Supporting Information files at the time of initial submission.

    A single PDF file or a zip folder including all the original images reported in the main figure and supplemental figures should be prepared. Authors should annotate each original image, corresponding to the figure in the main article or supplementary materials, and label each lane or loading order. All experimental samples and controls used for one comparative analysis should be run on the same blot/gel image. For quantitative analyses, please provide the blots/gels for each independent biological replicate used in the analysis.

    [Return to top]

    Supplementary Materials, Data Deposit and Software Source Code

    Advancesin Research Data Policies

    Advancesin is committed to supporting open scientific exchange and enabling our authors to achieve best practices in sharing and archiving research data. We encourage all authors of articles published in Advancesin journals to share their research data. Individual journal guidelines can be found at the journal ‘Instructions for Authors’ page. Data sharing policies concern the minimal dataset that supports the central findings of a published study. Generated data should be publicly available and cited in accordance with journal guidelines.

     

    Where ethical, legal or privacy issues are present, data should not be shared. The authors should make any limitations clear in the Data Availability Statement upon submission. Authors should ensure that data shared are in accordance with consent provided by participants on the use of confidential data.

    Data Availability Statements provide details regarding where data supporting reported results can be found, including links to publicly archived datasets analyzed or generated during the study.

    Below are suggested Data Availability Statements:

    Data citation:

    Computer Code and Software

    For work where novel computer code was developed, authors should release the code either by depositing in a recognized, public repository such as GitHub or uploading as supplementary information to the publication. The name, version, corporation and location information for all software used should be clearly indicated. Please include all the parameters used to run software/programs analyses.

    Supplementary Material

    Additional data and files can be uploaded as "Supplementary Files" during the manuscript submission process. The supplementary files will also be available to the referees as part of the peer-review process. Any file format is acceptable; however, we recommend that common, non-proprietary formats are used where possible.

    References in Supplementary Files

    Citations and References in Supplementary files are permitted provided that they also appear in the reference list of the main text.

    Unpublished Data

    Restrictions on data availability should be noted during submission and in the manuscript. "Data not shown" should be avoided: authors are encouraged to publish all observations related to the submitted manuscript as Supplementary Material. "Unpublished data" intended for publication in a manuscript that is either planned, "in preparation" or "submitted" but not yet accepted, should be cited in the text and a reference should be added in the References section. "Personal Communication" should also be cited in the text and reference added in the References section.

    Remote Hosting and Large Data Sets

    Data may be deposited with specialized service providers or institutional/subject repositories, preferably those that use the DataCite mechanism. Large data sets and files greater than 60 MB must be deposited in this way.   The data repository name, link to the data set (URL) and accession number, doi or handle number of the data set must be provided in the paper. The journal Data also accepts submissions of data set papers.

    Deposition of Sequences and of Expression Data

    New sequence information must be deposited to the appropriate database prior to submission of the manuscript. Accession numbers provided by the database should be included in the submitted manuscript. Manuscripts will not be published until the accession number is provided.

    Research and Publication Ethics

    Research Ethics

    Research Involving Human Subjects

    When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975, revised in 2013. According to point 23 of this declaration, an approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines. As a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ of the article.

    Example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."

    For non-interventional studies (e.g. surveys, questionnaires, social media research), all participants must be fully informed if the anonymity is assured, why the research is being conducted, how their data will be used and if there are any risks associated. As with all research involving humans, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee must be obtained prior to conducting the study. If ethical approval is not required, authors must either provide an exemption from the ethics committee or are encouraged to cite the local or national legislation that indicates ethics approval is not required for this type of study. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee which provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation regarding why ethical approval was not required.

    A written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participating patients. Data relating to individual participants must be described in detail, but private information identifying participants need not be included unless the identifiable materials are of relevance to the research (for example, photographs of participants’ faces that show a particular symptom). Patients’ initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in any images. For manuscripts that include any case details, personal information, and/or images of patients, authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication from patients (or their relatives/guardians) before submitting to Advancesin  journals. Patient details must be anonymized as far as possible, e.g., do not mention specific age, ethnicity, or occupation where they are not relevant to the conclusions. A template permission form is available to download. A blank version of the form used to obtain permission (without the patient names or signature) must be uploaded with your submission. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.

    You may refer to our sample form and provide an appropriate form after consulting with your affiliated institution. For the purposes of publishing in Advancesin journals, a consent, permission, or release form should include unlimited permission for publication in all formats (including print, electronic, and online), in sublicensed and reprinted versions (including translations and derived works), and in other works and products under open access license. To respect patients’ and any other individual’s privacy, please do not send signed forms. The journal reserves the right to ask authors to provide signed forms if necessary.

    If the study reports research involving vulnerable groups, an additional check may be performed. The submitted manuscript will be scrutinized by the editorial office and upon request, documentary evidence (blank consent forms and any related discussion documents from the ethics board) must be supplied. Additionally, when studies describe groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, disease, etc., explanation regarding why such categorization was needed must be clearly stated in the article.

    Ethical Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research

    The editors will require that the benefits potentially derived from any research causing harm to animals are significant in relation to any cost endured by animals, and that procedures followed are unlikely to cause offense to the majority of readers. Authors should particularly ensure that their research complies with the commonly-accepted '3Rs [1]':

    Authors must include details on housing, husbandry and pain management in their manuscript.

    For further guidance authors should refer to the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures [2], American Association for Laboratory Animal Science [3] or European Animal Research Association [4].

    If national legislation requires it, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must only be carried out after obtaining approval from the appropriate ethics committee. As a minimum, the project identification code, date of approval and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’. Research procedures must be carried out in accordance with national and institutional regulations. Statements on animal welfare should confirm that the study complied with all relevant legislation. Clinical studies involving animals and interventions outside of routine care require ethics committee oversight as per the American Veterinary Medical Association. If the study involved client-owned animals, informed client consent must be obtained and certified in the manuscript report of the research. Owners must be fully informed if there are any risks associated with the procedures and that the research will be published. If available, a high standard of veterinary care must be provided. Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript.

    If ethical approval is not required by national laws, authors must provide an exemption from the ethics committee, if one is available. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee that provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation on why the ethical approval was not required.

    If no animal ethics committee is available to review applications, authors should be aware that the ethics of their research will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective, using the same utilitarian framework that is used by ethics committees. Authors may be asked to provide this even if they have received ethical approval.

    Advancesin endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (arriveguidelines.org) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers must use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, Editors reserve the right to ask for the checklist and to reject submissions that do not adhere to these guidelines, to reject submissions based on ethical or animal welfare concerns or if the procedure described does not appear to be justified by the value of the work presented.

    Research Involving Cell Lines

    Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines the provenance should be stated and references must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.

    An example of Ethical Statements:

    The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXXXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXXX.

    Research Involving Plants

    Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild) including collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

    For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants , voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened or endangered species this can be waived but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.

    Editors reserve the rights to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.

    An example of Ethical Statements:

    Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country).

    Arabidopis mutant lines (SALKxxxx, SAILxxxx,…) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX , institute, city, country).

    Clinical Trials Registration

    Registration

    Advancesin follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)guidelines which require and recommend registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication.

    Purely observational studies do not require registration. A clinical trial not only refers to studies that take place in a hospital or involve pharmaceuticals, but also refer to all studies which involve participant randomization and group classification in the context of the intervention under assessment.

    Approval to conduct a study from an independent local, regional, or national review body is not equivalent to prospective clinical trial registration. MDPI reserves the right to decline any paper without trial registration for further peer-review. However, if the study protocol has been published before the enrolment, the registration can be waived with correct citation of the published protocol.

    CONSORT Statement

    [Return to top]

    Sex and Gender in Research

    We encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant. Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms. Article titles and/or abstracts should indicate clearly what sex(es) the study applies to. Authors should also describe in the background, whether sex and/or gender differences may be expected; report how sex and/or gender were accounted for in the design of the study; provide disaggregated data by sex and/or gender, where appropriate; and discuss respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not conducted, the rationale should be given in the Discussion. We suggest that our authors consult the full guidelines before submission.

    [Return to top]

    Borders and Territories

    Potential disputes over borders and territories may have particular relevance for authors in describing their research or in an author or editor correspondence address, and should be respected. Content decisions are an editorial matter and where there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will attempt to find a resolution that satisfies parties involved.

    Advancesin stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

    Publication Ethics Statement

    The editors of this journal enforce a rigorous peer-review process together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, image manipulation, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. The editors of Cancer cell research take such publishing ethics issues very seriously and are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy.

    Authors wishing to publish their papers in Cancers must abide to the following:

    Citation Policy

    Authors should ensure that where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing) the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained.

    Authors should not engage in excessive self-citation of their own work.

    Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.

    Authors should not preferentially cite their own or their friends’, peers’, or institution’s publications.

    Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.

    In accordance with COPE guidelines, we expect that “original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.” This condition also applies to an author’s own work. COPE have produced a discussion document on citation manipulation with recommendations for best practice.

    Reviewer Suggestions

    During the submission process, please suggest three potential reviewers with the appropriate expertise to review the manuscript. The editors will not necessarily approach these referees. Please provide detailed contact information (address, e-mail address). The proposed referees should neither be current collaborators of the co-authors nor have published with any of the co-authors of the manuscript within the last five years. Proposed reviewers should be from different institutions to the authors. You may identify appropriate Editorial Board members of the journal as potential reviewers. You may suggest reviewers from among the authors that you frequently cite in your paper.

    [Return to top]

    English Corrections

    To facilitate proper peer-reviewing of your manuscript, it is essential that it is submitted in grammatically correct English.

    If you are not a native English speaker, we recommend that you have your manuscript professionally edited before submission or read by a native English-speaking colleague. Professional editing will enable reviewers and future readers to more easily read and assess the content of submitted manuscripts. All accepted manuscripts undergo language editing, however an additional fee will be charged to authors 

    Preprints and Conference Papers

    Cancer cell research accepts submissions that have previously been made available as preprints provided that they have not undergone peer review. A preprint is a draft version of a paper made available online before submission to a journal.

    Advancesin operates Preprints, a preprint server to which submitted papers can be uploaded directly after completing journal submission. Note that Preprints operates independently of the journal and posting a preprint does not affect the peer review process. Check the Preprints instructions for authors for further information.

    Expanded and high-quality conference papers can be considered as articles if they fulfill the following requirements: (1) the paper should be expanded to the size of a research article; (2) the conference paper should be cited and noted on the first page of the paper; (3) if the authors do not hold the copyright of the published conference paper, authors should seek the appropriate permission from the copyright holder; (4) authors are asked to disclose that it is conference paper in their cover letter and include a statement on what has been changed compared to the original conference paper. Cancer cell research does not publish pilot studies or studies with inadequate statistical power.

    Unpublished conference papers that do not meet the above conditions are recommended to be submitted to the Proceedings Series journals.

    [Return to top]

    Authorship

    Advancesin follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines which state that, in order to qualify for authorship of a manuscript, the following criteria should be observed:

    Those who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments.

    Any change to the author list should be approved by all authors including any who have been removed from the list. The corresponding author should act as a point of contact between the editor and the other authors and should keep co-authors informed and involve them in major decisions about the publication. We reserve the right to request confirmation that all authors meet the authorship conditions.

    Reviewers Recommendation

    Authors can recommend potential reviewers. Journal editors will check to make sure there are no conflicts of interest before contacting those reviewers, and will not consider those with competing interests. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest. Authors can also enter the names of potential peer reviewers they wish to exclude from consideration in the peer review of their manuscript, during the initial submission progress. The editorial team will respect these requests so long as this does not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.

    Editorial Independence

    Lack of Interference With Editorial Decisions

    Editorial independence is of utmost importance and Advancesin does not interfere with editorial decisions. All articles published by Advancesin are peer reviewed and assessed by our independent editorial boards, and Advancesin staff are not involved in decisions to accept manuscripts. When making an editorial decision, we expect the academic editor to make their decision based only upon:

    In all of our journals, in every aspect of operation, Advancesin policies are informed by the mission to make science and research findings open and accessible as widely and rapidly as possible.

    Editors and Editorial Staff as Authors

    Editorial staff or editors shall not be involved in processing their own academic work. Submissions authored by editorial staff/editors will be assigned to at least two independent outside reviewers. Decisions will be made by other Editorial Board Members who do not have a conflict of interest with the author. Journal staff are not involved in the processing of their own work submitted to any Advancesin journals.

    Conflict of Interests

    According to The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and non-profit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and publish manuscripts independently when and where they choose.”

    All authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence or bias their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include but are not limited to financial interests (such as membership, employment, consultancies, stocks/shares ownership, honoraria, grants or other funding, paid expert testimonies and patent-licensing arrangements) and non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, personal beliefs).

    Authors can disclose potential conflicts of interest via the online submission system during the submission process. The corresponding author must include a summary statement in the manuscript in a separate section “Conflicts of Interest” placed just before the reference list. The statement should reflect all the collected potential conflict of interest disclosures in the form.

    See below for examples of disclosures:

    Conflicts of Interest: Author A has received research grants from Company A. Author B has received a speaker honorarium from Company X and owns stocks in Company Y. Author C has been involved as a consultant and expert witness in Company Z. Author D is the inventor of patent X.

    If no conflicts exist, the authors should state:

    Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

    [Return to top]

    Editorial Procedures and Peer-Review

    Initial Checks

    All submitted manuscripts received by the Editorial Office will be checked by a professional in-house Managing Editor to determine whether they are properly prepared and whether they follow the ethical policies of the journal, including those for human and animal experimentation. Manuscripts that do not fit the journal's ethics policy or do not meet the standards of the journal will be rejected before peer-review. Manuscripts that are not properly prepared will be returned to the authors for revision and resubmission. After these checks, the Managing Editor will consult the journals’ Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors to determine whether the manuscript fits the scope of the journal and whether it is scientifically sound. No judgment on the potential impact of the work will be made at this stage. Reject decisions at this stage will be verified by the Editor-in-Chief.

    Peer-Review

    Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. A single-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are known to reviewers. Peer review comments are confidential and will only be disclosed with the express agreement of the reviewer.

    In the case of regular submissions, in-house assistant editors will invite experts, including recommendations by an academic editor. These experts may also include Editorial Board Members and Guest Editors of the journal. Potential reviewers suggested by the authors may also be considered. Reviewers should not have published with any of the co-authors during the past three years and should not currently work or collaborate with any of the institutions of the co-authors of the submitted manuscript.

    Optional Open Peer-Review

    The journal operates optional open peer-review: Authors are given the option for all review reports and editorial decisions to be published alongside their manuscript. In addition, reviewers can sign their review, i.e., identify themselves in the published review reports. Authors can alter their choice for open review at any time before publication, but once the paper has been published changes will only be made at the discretion of the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. We encourage authors to take advantage of this opportunity as proof of the rigorous process employed in publishing their research. To guarantee impartial refereeing, the names of referees will be revealed only if the referees agree to do so, and after a paper has been accepted for publication.

    Editorial Decision and Revision

    All the articles, reviews and communications published in MDPI journals go through the peer-review process and receive at least two reviews. The in-house editor will communicate the decision of the academic editor, which will be one of the following:

    All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.

    Author Appeals

    Authors may appeal a rejection by sending an e-mail to the Editorial Office of the journal. The appeal must provide a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments. The Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or Editorial Board member. The academic Editor being consulted will be asked to give an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.

    In the case of a special issue, the Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief who will be asked to give an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage will be final and cannot be reversed.

    Production and Publication

    Once accepted, the manuscript will undergo professional copy-editing, English editing, proofreading by the authors, final corrections, pagination, and, publication on the   website.

    [Return to top]

     

    [Return to top]