Advertisement

info@clinicsearchonline.com
+1-(302)-520-2644
+1-(302)-520-2644

Editorial Work Flow

  1. Home
  2. Ediotrial Work Flow
Submit Guidelines

Editorial Work Flow

On each successful submission of the manuscript, the author will be acknowledged accordingly. All the manuscripts are subjected to plagiarism check and pre QC Check. Once the manuscript is accepted in pre QC, it will be assigned to one of our most eminent editors of relevant expertise. The editor has the privilege of accepting/rejecting/suggest for revision of the manuscript based on the quality. The editor may also assign the work of reviewing the manuscript to 2-3 reviewers of same expertise. The reviewers have the freedom to accept/reject/suggest for revision of the manuscript based on the quality and novelty of the paper. The articles will be accepted if at least 2 out of 3 (majority) express their acceptance. If any reviewer suggests for revision i.e. major or minor, corresponding author will be notified for the revision (with suggested amendments) towards the publication. If at least 2 out of 3 (majority) suggest to reject the article, it will be rejected and author will be intimated accordingly.

The revised manuscripts will be cross checked with the reviewer’s comments and published with their acceptance. However the editor’s decision is final in any stage of the editorial process. Articles submitted to other journals, published articles, articles with plagiarism, copied articles without any reference will be strictly rejected. ClinicSearch follows fast track 14 days peer review process (*provided all the details are accurate). Full texts and PDF formats of the accepted articles will be made available on line with in 3-5 days of acceptance at Article in press.

Clinical Trials and Clinical Research: I am delighted to provide a testimonial for the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and the exceptional quality of the journal for my article entitled “Effect of Traditional Moxibustion in Assisting the Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients.” The peer review process for my article was rigorous and thorough, ensuring that only high-quality research is published in the journal. The reviewers provided valuable feedback and constructive criticism that greatly improved the clarity and scientific rigor of my study. Their expertise and attention to detail helped me refine my research methodology and strengthen the overall impact of my findings. I would also like to express my gratitude for the exceptional support I received from the editorial office throughout the publication process. The editorial team was prompt, professional, and highly responsive to all my queries and concerns. Their guidance and assistance were instrumental in navigating the submission and revision process, making it a seamless and efficient experience. Furthermore, I am impressed by the outstanding quality of the journal itself. The journal’s commitment to publishing cutting-edge research in the field of stroke rehabilitation is evident in the diverse range of articles it features. The journal consistently upholds rigorous scientific standards, ensuring that only the most impactful and innovative studies are published. This commitment to excellence has undoubtedly contributed to the journal’s reputation as a leading platform for stroke rehabilitation research. In conclusion, I am extremely satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the overall quality of the journal for my article. I wholeheartedly recommend this journal to researchers and clinicians interested in stroke rehabilitation and related fields. The journal’s dedication to scientific rigor, coupled with the exceptional support provided by the editorial office, makes it an invaluable platform for disseminating research and advancing the field.

img

Dr Shiming Tang