The following is the editorial process that every manuscript submitted to the European Journal of Clinical Oncology undergoes during the peer-review process. All the editorial process is performed using advanced software (lexis manuscript tracking system). Once a manuscript is submitted for publication, the manuscript is examined by the journal’s editorial office (technical check step) to ensure that it is appropriate to undergo the normal peer review process. In technical check step we will check subject coverage, language quality, statistical validation, plagiarism, novelty and etc. in this step also the manuscript will send to suitable Editors based on the topic of the manuscript and the accessibility of the Editors. If the Editors discern that the manuscript may not have adequate quality to go through the normal peer review process, or that the topic of the manuscript may not be suitable for the journal’s scope, the manuscript will be rejected with no further processing. If the Editors find that the submitted manuscript is of proper quality and is within the scope of the journal, they would provide the manuscript to a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 3 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers give their reports on the manuscripts together with their suggesting of one of the following actions to the Editor:
When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following editorial suggestions:
If the Editor recommends “Publish Unaltered,” the manuscript is accepted to be published. If the Editor suggests “Consider after Minor Changes,” the authors are informed to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the necessary minor changes that have been recommended by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the corrected manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor finds the final manuscript satisfactory, the manuscript can be accepted. If the Editor suggests “Consider after Major Changes,” the suggestion is informed to the authors. The authors are expected to apply the revisions in their manuscripts in accordance with the changes suggested by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscript on time. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor can then make an editorial suggestion which can be “Publish Unaltered,” “Consider after Minor Changes,” or “Reject.” If the Editor suggests rejecting the manuscript, the rejection occurs. Also, if two of the reviewers suggest rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is occurred. The editorial process gives the Editors the permission to reject any manuscript due to its subject not being suitable, lacking quality, or wrongness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, just, and unprejudiced peer-review process of each manuscript submitted to the European Journal of Clinical Oncology, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor responsible for the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the European Journal of Clinical Oncology. The peer-review process is double blinded; that is, the reviewers not know who the authors of the manuscript are, and also the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer reviewers are. We arranged this method in lexis manuscript tracking system by get title page (contain full authors information) and manuscript file (without any authors information). All process in lexis manuscript tracking system followed by email and sms between all involved roles and also all steps.