Editorial Process
The editorial process at Bytran Publishing Services (BPS) is built on clarity, fairness, and scientific responsibility. Every manuscript is handled with care to ensure that published work meets the highest standards of accuracy, integrity, and clinical or academic value. All manuscripts submitted to BPS journals undergo double blind peer review. Both reviewers and authors remain anonymous during the review process to promote fairness and reduce bias.
1. Initial Editorial Assessment
Each manuscript begins with an internal review by the editorial office. The team checks that the submission matches the journal focus, follows basic formatting requirements, and includes all essential documents. The manuscript is also screened with similarity detection software (iThenticate or an equivalent tool) to ensure originality. If major issues are identified at this stage, the editorial office may return the work to the authors for correction or decline it with an explanation.
2. Assignment to an Editor
After passing the initial evaluation, the manuscript is assigned to an editor who has the appropriate expertise. This editor conducts a first reading to assess scientific clarity, relevance to the journal mission, and overall suitability for external review. When a manuscript falls outside the required standards, the editor may recommend an early decision in order to provide timely feedback to the authors.
3. Selection of Reviewers
The editor selects external-independent reviewers who have strong subject knowledge and an established record of academic or clinical work in the relevant area. Reviewers are chosen with care to ensure diversity of perspectives and to avoid personal or professional connections that could influence their judgment.
4. Review and Assessment
The review process is conducted with complete confidentiality for both authors and reviewers. Reviewers examine the manuscript in detail and comment on scientific accuracy, quality of methodology, clarity of interpretation, and ethical compliance. Their reports offer suggestions for improvement and may also highlight concerns such as missing data, unclear procedures, or potential issues with research conduct.
5. Editorial Evaluation of Reviewer Feedback
Once reviewer comments are received, the editor examines the feedback as a whole and evaluates the relevance, consistency, and scientific reasoning behind each point. The editor then prepares a decision letter that includes all reviewer comments and any additional guidance that may help the authors improve the work.
6. Revision and Author Response
Authors who receive a revision request are expected to revise their manuscript carefully and prepare a detailed response that explains how each comment has been addressed. This response must be clear and transparent. In some cases, the revised manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers to confirm that the concerns have been fully resolved.
7. Final Editorial Decision
The final decision is made by the handling editor or the Editor-in-Chief. The decision is based on scientific merit, clarity of reporting, compliance with ethical standards, and the overall contribution of the work to current knowledge. All decisions are communicated clearly and respectfully, with the goal of supporting authors in presenting their research at its best.
8. Production and Publication
Accepted manuscripts move into production, where they are edited for clarity, consistency, and journal style. Authors receive page proofs and are asked to check for accuracy. Once approved, the article is published online as the official version, complete with a digital object identifier for permanent access.
9. Appeal Process
Authors who believe their manuscript was not evaluated fairly may submit a written appeal. The appeal is reviewed by senior editorial leadership and, when needed, by an independent advisor. All appeals are handled transparently and with respect for all parties involved.
10. Commitment to Quality Improvement
BPS continually evaluates its editorial practices to ensure that review times, decision clarity, and ethical procedures remain at a high standard. Feedback from editors, reviewers, and authors is used to strengthen policies and to maintain a process that is reliable, respectful, and aligned with global expectations for scholarly publishing.
On average, the time from submission to first editorial decision is approximately four to six weeks. Once a manuscript is accepted, it proceeds to professional editing, typesetting, and proofing, with online publication typically within two weeks. For more detailed information, authors may consult the Peer Review Process section on the For Authors website.
