•  
  •  
 

Review Process

All submitted papers will be initially evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief for suitability for KIJOMS. Manuscripts deemed suitable are sent to a minimum of two external peer reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The selection of peer reviewers is made by the article handling editor (the Editor-in-Chief or the specialist editor). Authors are requested to suggest reviewers but the editors reserve the right of the final selection. This journal operates a single-blind review process (the names of the reviewers are hidden from the author). After completing all reviewers' reports, the handling editor makes a decision (accept, major revision, minor revision or reject). The authors receive from 1 to 3 weeks to prepare the revision depending on the reviewers' comments. Any revisions should be clearly highlighted, for example using the font in color, so that they are easily visible to the editors and reviewers. The authors should provide a response to reviewers' comments detailing any changes, for the benefit of the editors and reviewers. The revisions that have been made should be detailed citing the line number and exact change so that the editor can check the changes expeditiously. Revisions that do not meet these requirements will be sent back to authors with requests for corrections and resubmission. Some articles may have two or three rounds of peer review. The average duration of the submission to the first decision is 6 weeks. The average duration of the submission to the final decision is 10 weeks. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final.