Sentam Research
& Publishing
Peer Review Process
Our Commitment to Excellence
At SENTAM Journals, we are committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, scholarly excellence, and transparent editorial practices. The following guide outlines the steps involved in our peer review process, from manuscript submission to final decision, and serves as a reference for authors intending to publish with us.
Initial Manuscript Submission
Authors are required to submit their manuscripts through our online submission system. Submissions must strictly adhere to SENTAM Journals' submission guidelines, including formatting, referencing style, ethical declarations, and the inclusion of all supporting documents such as a cover letter, figures, and data availability statement.
Editorial Pre-Screening
Following submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to evaluate its relevance to the journal's scope, academic merit, originality, and compliance with ethical publishing standards such as plagiarism and conflicts of interest.
Timeline: This stage typically takes 5-7 working days.
Note: Manuscripts may be desk-rejected if they fall outside the journal's scope or fail to meet the minimum quality threshold.
Screening Criteria
- Relevance to journal scope
- Academic merit and originality
- Compliance with ethical publishing standards
- Plagiarism and conflict of interest checks
- Formatting and submission guideline compliance
Assignment to Handling Editor
If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it is assigned to a qualified Section or Handling Editor with relevant subject expertise. The Handling Editor oversees the peer review process and serves as the main point of contact for authors and reviewers throughout the review cycle.
Peer Review Process
SENTAM Journals employs a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure objectivity and academic fairness. Two to three independent reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the relevant field.
Review Criteria
Reviewers assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including:
- Originality and significance of the research
- Scientific rigor and methodological soundness
- Clarity of presentation
- Appropriateness of the methodology
- Soundness of conclusions
Review Timeline
Standard Review Period: 21 days
Extensions may be granted on a case-by-case basis.
Editorial Decision
Upon receipt of reviewers' comments, the Handling Editor synthesizes the feedback and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. Based on the reviewers' evaluations and editorial assessment, the manuscript may be categorized under one of the following decisions:
| Decision | Description |
|---|---|
| Accept | Ready for publication |
| Minor Revisions | Small changes required |
| Major Revisions | Significant improvements needed |
| Reject | Not suitable for publication |
The decision, along with detailed reviewer feedback, is communicated to the author to guide the next steps.
Revision and Resubmission
Authors whose manuscripts require revisions are expected to submit a revised version within the specified timeframe:
Minor Revisions
- Deadline: 14 days
- Small corrections and clarifications
Major Revisions
- Deadline: 30 days
- Substantial changes to content or methodology
Revision Requirements
- Submit revised manuscript within specified timeframe
- Include point-by-point response to reviewers' comments
- Highlight changes made in the revised version
Note: Depending on the nature of the revisions, the revised submission may undergo an additional round of peer review.
Final Decision and Acceptance
Once the revised manuscript meets all scholarly and editorial expectations, it is formally accepted for publication. The authors will receive an official acceptance letter, and the manuscript will enter the production stage for copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading prior to publication.
Online Publication
Accepted articles are published online as "Early View" papers prior to their inclusion in a regular journal issue. Each article is assigned a unique DOI and is indexed as per our journal policies.
Post-Publication Oversight
SENTAM Journals adheres to the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In cases where post-publication issues arise—such as ethical violations, errors, or data concerns—the journal reserves the right to issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern following a thorough investigation.
Key Principles of Our Review Process
Our peer review process is anchored on the principles of:
- Transparency: Clear communication at every stage
- Confidentiality: Manuscript content and reviewer identities remain confidential
- Academic Integrity: Highest standards of ethical publishing
- Timeliness: Efficient review process completion
Overall Timeline
Target Completion: 4 to 8 weeks from the date of submission
Our editorial team strives to complete the peer review process within this timeframe while maintaining quality standards.
Become a Reviewer
We welcome scholars and experts interested in contributing to the academic community by serving as peer reviewers. To register, please visit our reviewer sign-up page and submit your credentials along with your areas of expertise.
Get Involved
Join our community of expert reviewers and help maintain the quality of academic publishing.