About the Journal
PEER-REVIEW PROCESS
Articles submitted to the Journal of Radiological Technology undergo peer-review. Peer-review process is double anonymous, i.e. Reviewers do not know who the authors of the manuscript are, and authors do not have access to information about who the reviewers are. Without the significant contributions of reviewers, publication of the journal would not be possible.
Once a manuscript is submitted, it is assigned to the editor best suited to handle it, based on the subject of the manuscript and the editor's availability. If the editor determines that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to pass through the normal review process or if the subject of the manuscript is not appropriate for the journal's focus, the editor rejects the manuscript without further processing.
If the editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the focus of the journal, he/she assigns the manuscript to a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 5 external reviewers for review. Reviewers submit their manuscript reports, along with recommendations for one of the following actions, to the editor:
Accept submission (Publish unchanged)
Revisions required (consider after minor changes)
Resubmit for review (consider after major changes)
Rejection of submission (rejection: manuscript is deficient or not new enough)
When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations: Publish unchanged, Consider after minor changes, Consider after major changes, Reject.
If the editor recommends "Publish unchanged", the manuscript is accepted for publication.
If the editor recommends "Consider after minor changes", authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the necessary minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The revised manuscript is reviewed by the editor after minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the confirmation can be accepted.
If the editor recommends "Consider after major changes", the recommendation is communicated to the authors. Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscripts in a timely manner. Once a revised manuscript has been submitted, the editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be "Publish unchanged" or "Consider with minor changes" or "Reject".
If the editor recommends rejection of the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if two reviewers recommend rejection of the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editorial work gives the editors the authority to reject any manuscript due to the inappropriateness of the subject, poor quality or inaccuracy of the results. The editor cannot assign himself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a quality, fair and unbiased review process for each manuscript submitted to the journal, as any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the editor in charge of the manuscript in order to be accepted for publication in the journal.
PUBLISHING ETHICS
Our Statement on Publication Ethics and Misconduct is based on the “Codes of Conduct and Guidelines for Best Practice” developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics(COPE) (http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct). International Standards for Editors and Authors were developed at the 2nd WCRI (see http://publicationethics.org/resources/international-standards-for-editors-and-authors).
Publication decisions: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. An editor may be guided by the journal's editorial policies and limited by the legal requirements then in effect regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor can agree with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play: The editor evaluates manuscripts on the basis of intellectual content at any time without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality: The Editor and any Editorial Board may not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in the editor's research without the express written consent of the author.
Archiving Policy:
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions: Expert review helps the editor in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with the author that can help the author improve the work.
