Initial Checks/ Desk Review

The journal staff and in-house editorial team perform an initial quality check to identify potential issues such as:

• Competing interests
• Compliance with editorial policies and ethical standards including plagiarism check etc.
• Financial disclosures
• Data availability

Submissions may be returned to authors for changes or clarifications at this stage.

Peer Review

After completing internal checks, each new submission is assigned to two peer reviewers with relevant expertise. The peer reviewers review the manuscripts against our publication criteria and determine whether modifications are needed in the manuscripts. Each handling peer reviewer is a member of IBT JBS Reviewer's board. The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) selects reviewers based on expertise, publication history, and past reviews, and invites them to provide feedback on the manuscript. After agreeing to review, external peer reviewers typically have 30 days to submit their review. IBT JBS uses double-blind peer review. Reviewers remain anonymous unless they choose to identify themselves by signing their name to their review in our submission system.

EIC Decision

The EIC considers reviewer feedback and their own evaluation of the manuscript to reach a decision. The following decision types are available:

• Reject
• Major revision
• Minor revision
• Accept

Decisions are communicated to the corresponding author in a formal letter, along with reviewer feedback and any other requirements from the journal office.

Revisions

If the EIC feels that the manuscript has the potential to be published but requires changes, the author(s) will be invited to revise it. They will be given 30 days to resubmit the revised manuscript for either major or minor revision.