Volunteer reviewers who wish to commit themselves to achieve timely reviews are welcome to send an e-mail with some information about their domain of expertise to the Editor. As you know, the quality of published papers only depends on the peer reviewing system, and most of our current reviewers are regularly overloaded with reviews ...
|Welcome to Submission and Review Tracking System ® Authors are welcome to submit their work directly here, as no other submission method will be accepted from now on. Please read the guidelines for authors before submitting your work.|
* Authors: Submit a paper (see Submission instructions below, and check the guidelines for authors).
* Authors: Check the status; submit a revised version, etc, of an already-submitted paper. You will need at least the paper Id (and you can get the password by e-mail if you lost it).
* Reviewers: Enter your review(s), comments and recommendation(s) for paper(s) you have accepted to review.
Your reviewer login is your e-mail address, and you can get your password by e-mail if you lost it.
* Action editors: Manage the review process for the papers you have been assigned.
Again, your editor login is your e-mail, and you can get your password by e-mail if you lost it.
Below you will find some Submission Instructions, a brief description of the Review Process, and how we would like it to actually work. Paper submission
* Before considering submitting your work to Scholars Central Group, please read the guidelines for authors.
* The precise format description for all types of papers is available on omicsonline.org Web site.
* Remember that, though we accept any (easily printable!) format for submissions, the final versions of all papers have to be provided in Word or PDF formats.
* You will find all style files to prepare your paper here, at http://omicsonline.org/
Review process What happens after a paper has been submitted?
* First, the Editor in Chief sends it to an Action Editor (most likely one of the Associate Editors if they are not already too busy).
* The Action Editor finds at least 3 independent reviewers. Most likely again, one of them is a member of the Editorial Board
* When all reviewers have entered their review in the system, the Action Editor can either make a recommendation to the Editor in Chief, based on the reviews and his/her own opinion, or start a discussion among the reviewers if there is some disagreement. The discussion involves all reviewers, the Action Editor and the Editor in Chief.
* After an agreed decision has been reached, the authors are notified by the Editor in Chief or the Action Editor.
* The possible decisions are
- Accept the paper can be published as it is now (except maybe for some typos).
- Accept: with minor revisions: the paper will have to be slightly revised following the reviewers' comments, but there will not be any additional round of review, only the Action Editor and/or the Editor in Chief will check the modifications.
- Revise and resubmit: it is agreed that the topic is worth publishing, but the paper requires large revisions before it can actually be published. The revised paper will not be considered as a completely new submission, though: if a revised version is sent within 6 months, it will most probably be handled by the same Action Editor.
- Reject: the paper is out of scope, or does not contain any significant contribution, or may be simply too difficult to understand. In any case, the same work should not be resubmitted without a very large amount of work.
* Last but not least, it is our goal that the whole review process does not take more than 4 months before the decision is sent to the authors. To be honest, it is hoped that the opening of this electronic submission-and-review Web site will help us to reach that goal - our apologies to the authors who experienced much longer delays in the past.
Do not hesitate to send your comments and suggestions about this site; we know there is room for improvement