The SCICONX Journal of Analytical Chemistry (JAC) follows a structured, transparent, and rigorous peer review system to ensure the publication of high-quality, reliable, and scientifically sound research. The peer review process is designed to uphold the integrity of scholarly communication while providing authors with constructive feedback to enhance their work.

This journla employs a double-blind peer review model, where both the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the evaluation process to ensure impartiality and objectivity.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s official submission system or designated email. Submissions must comply with the journal’s formatting and ethical guidelines.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the manuscript undergoes a preliminary assessment by the editorial office or assigned editor. This stage includes:

• Verification of compliance with journal scope and submission guidelines
• Evaluation of manuscript structure, clarity, and completeness
• Screening for plagiarism and ethical concerns
• Assessment of originality and scientific relevance

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be rejected without external review.

3. Assignment to Handling Editor

Eligible manuscripts are assigned to a qualified editor with relevant expertise. The handling editor is responsible for overseeing the entire peer review process.

4. Reviewer Selection and Invitation

The handling editor selects two to three independent reviewers based on their expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript and must confirm:

• Availability within the review timeframe
• Absence of conflicts of interest

5. Double-Blind Peer Review

During this stage:

• Reviewers assess the manuscript without access to author identities
• Authors remain unaware of reviewer identities
• Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on scientific merit, methodology, originality, and clarity

Reviewers provide detailed reports along with recommendations.

6. Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

• Relevance to analytical chemistry and journal scope
• Novelty and scientific contribution
• Methodological accuracy and reproducibility
• Quality and integrity of data
• Clarity of presentation and organization
• Appropriateness of references and citations

7. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports and editorial judgment, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

• Accept – Manuscript is suitable for publication without changes
• Minor Revision – Requires small modifications
• Major Revision – Requires substantial improvements
• Reject – Manuscript does not meet the required standards

Authors are provided with reviewer comments and editorial feedback.

8. Revision by Authors

Authors are expected to:

• Address all reviewer comments systematically
• Provide a detailed response to reviewers
• Highlight changes made in the revised manuscript

Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

9. Final Decision

After satisfactory revision, the editor makes a final decision regarding acceptance. The decision is based on:

• Adequacy of revisions
• Reviewer recommendations
• Overall scientific quality

10. Copyediting and Publication

Accepted manuscripts undergo:

• Language editing and formatting
• Proofreading and author approval
• Final publication in the journal

Timeline

JAC is committed to an efficient review process:

• Initial Decision: within 2-3 days
• Peer Review Completion: 14-21 days
• Final Decision Post-Revisions: 5-7 days
• Online Publication: within 7–10 days of acceptance

Ethical Standards in Peer Review

JAC ensures strict adherence to ethical principles:

• Confidentiality - All manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential.
• Impartiality - Decisions are based solely on scientific merit without bias.
• Conflict of Interest - Editors and reviewers must disclose and avoid any conflicts.
• Integrity - Any form of misconduct, including plagiarism or data fabrication, is addressed promptly and appropriately.

Quality Assurance

The peer review process is designed to:

• Maintain high scientific standards
• Ensure accuracy and reproducibility
• Improve manuscript quality through expert feedback
• Promote transparency and accountability

Role of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

• Authors: Submit original work and respond to feedback constructively
• Reviewers: Provide unbiased, thorough, and timely evaluations
• Editors: Ensure fairness, quality, and ethical compliance throughout the process

Continuous Improvement

JAC regularly evaluates and refines its peer review practices to align with international publishing standards and evolving scientific expectations.

The SCICONX Journal of Analytical Chemistry (JAC) is committed to a fair, transparent, and rigorous peer review process that supports the dissemination of high-quality research and contributes to the advancement of analytical chemistry.