Scientific journal editors has the responsibility towards the authors, peer reviewers, journal readers and scientific community. Editors should greatly maintain and improve the standards of the Journal by handling meticulous peer review process in the sense of quality.
The important role of an editor is to pick up accurate reviewer in a particular field to enhance the quality of the manuscript. Editor should determine whether the submitted manuscripts are suitable to the scope of the journal or not, after which they are generally reviewed by a minimum of two experts and a handling editor (here review comments are considered). In any case editor’s decision remains final.
Also, the editor's responsibility is to provide his/her final decision based on the novelty and quality of the manuscript after the completion of peer review process. Finally the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts depends on the recommendation from peer reviewers as well as from editor.
First of all editors should evaluate and disseminate the scientific material whether it is suitable to scope of the journal or not, and should determine the following points:
Is the research question posed important, original and well defined?
Is the data provided in the manuscripts meritorious and well supported with necessary explanations?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the submitted article?
Normally each editor has to review or process at least two manuscripts per month.
They should communicate with other board members of that particular journal regarding steady stream of articles, peer-review process, timelines on reviewer’s response, quality of published material etc.
They should possess the skills to rewrite the manuscripts which may have been written poorly.
Should provide guidelines to authors for preparing, submitting manuscripts and making revised versions according to peer review comments. They should also provide the guidelines to editorial office to get quality manuscripts from authors/contributors in constructive manner.
Making editorial decisions within reasonable time and communicate to them in a clear and positive manner. They have to take the decision based on the reviewer's detailed and constructive comments, which will be helpful to the authors to their progressive manuscripts
Editor or reviewer should comment about paper whether it should be a Major revision or Minor revision or Re-review
Confidentiality: All information of the research work must be confidential by the Editors/reviewers and the publication staff.
Sassari University, Italy
Archive of Urological Research
China University of Political Science and Law, China
Forensic Science Today
Former member of MGH, USA
International Journal of Immunotherapy and Cancer Research
University of Genoa, Italy
Global Journal of Allergy
University of Siena, Italy
Archives of Renal Diseases and Management
Manuel Jose Lis Arias
Polytechnic University of Catalonia, Spain
Archive of Biochemistry
International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory (INL), Portugal
International Journal of Nanomaterials, Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
Lyon Catholic University (UCLy) and Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (EPHE), France
Annals of Cytology and Pathology
Democritus University of Thrace , Greece
International Journal of Vascular Surgery and Medicine
Jose Manuel Ramia-Angel
Guadalajara University Hospital , Spain
Journal of Surgery and Surgical Research