Peer-Review Process
Manuscripts may be rejected directly without peer review by the Editor-in-Chief if they do not comply with the submission guidelines or are outside the scope of the European Journal of Therapeutics.
The Editor-in-Chief and/or Section Editor checks the scientific level of the article and decides whether to invite a referee.
If it is decided that the scientific quality of the article is not good enough, a "rejection" decision can be made by the Editor-in-Chief.
If the editors decide that the scientific quality of the article is high, they invite at least two referees for the article.
All submissions are checked by the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor and at least 2 external reviewers before a publication decision are made. Reviewers are invited by the Editor-in-Chief and/or Section Editor based on their previous academic contributions and other qualifications.
Referees may suggest minor revisions, major revisions, acceptance of the article without revision or rejection.
Editor-in-Chief and/or Section Editor may request revisions for the article from the authors in line with the referee reports.
When submitting a revised version of a paper, the author must submit a detailed “Response to the reviewers” that states point by point how each issue raised by the reviewers has been covered and where it can be found (each reviewer’s comment, followed by the author’s reply and line numbers where the changes have been made) as well as an annotated copy of the main document. Revised manuscripts must be submitted within 30 days from the date of the decision letter.
If the revised version of the manuscript is not submitted within the allocated time, the revision option may be canceled.
If the submitting author(s) believe that additional time is required, they should request this extension before the initial 30-day period is over.
The final decision on the acceptance or rejection of articles is made by the Editor-in-Chief or, in rare cases, by the Section Editor authorised explicitly by the Editor-in-Chief for the relevant article.
Reviewers should consider the "Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers"
