All journals uphold a peer-reviewed, rapid, and rigorous manuscript handling and editorial process.
All manuscripts sent for publication in our journals are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed by experts (this includes research and review articles, spontaneous submissions, and invited papers). The Managing Editor of the journal will perform a technical pre-check of the manuscript’s suitability upon receipt. The academic editor will be notified of the submission and invited to perform an editorial pre-check. The Editorial Office will then organize the peer-review process performed by independent experts and collect at least two review reports per manuscript. To uphold transparency and keep authors informed on the progress of the peer review, a preliminary version of the reviewers' reports, collected during the peer-review process, is made accessible to authors via the Susy platform. Authors can see in real-time the content and how many reviewer reports have been collected. As these reviewer reports have not been checked by an academic editor, authors are recommended to refrain from undertaking any revision until the full editorial assessment has been conducted and official notification has been received by the Editorial Office. We ask our authors for adequate revisions (with a second round of peer-review if necessary) before a final decision is made. The final decision is made by the academic editor (usually the Editor-in-Chief/Editorial Board Member of a journal or the Guest Editor of a Special Issue). Accepted articles are copy-edited and English-edited.
All the articles, reviews and communications published in MDPI journals go through the peer-review process and receive at least two review reports. The in-house editor will discuss each step of the process with the external academic editor and communicate decisions to the authors regarding the following:
Accept in Present Form: The paper is accepted without any further changes.
Minor Revisions: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given five days for minor revisions.
Major Revisions: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. A maximum of two rounds of major revision per manuscript is normally provided. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within ten days and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments. If the required revision time is estimated to be longer than 2 months, we will recommend that authors withdraw their manuscript before resubmitting so as to avoid unnecessary time pressure and to ensure that all manuscripts are sufficiently revised.
Reject: The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.