Policies

Review Process

The SDJ team and reviewers are working hard to reduce review time to minimum. Then, the reviewer's comments should be applied to revise the manuscript, after which it should be uploaded to the journal again unless the journal’s decision on your paper is reject with possibility of resubmission.

Follow the track change mode for word documents to enhance the process of reassessment of your paper.

SDJ is a peer reviewed Journal; all manuscripts go through a process of evaluation and reviewing. Every manuscript is referred to two reviewers and may be referred to a statistical reviewer if required.

Reviewers’ comments are sent to the author plus suggestions by the editor that would be helpful in this process. The revised version should be submitted back within a period of 30 days of receipt of the editor's comments.

Editorial decisions

Decisions made by the editorial board are based on the strength of arguments put forward by our reviewers and the authors as well as other considerations for each individual manuscript. This is the journal’s principal responsibility toward our readership, which is part of the scientific community. Thereby, we can serve our readers by considering the state of each article in relation to the many other articles also under evaluation.

Occasionally different and possibly conflicting recommendations might be provided by the two reviewers on the same paper, based on different experiences of our reviewers in the same field of knowledge. Therefore, the editorial board may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice during the process of unification of the reviewers’ comments and advice.

Double blind peer review

The reviewing process of SDJ is a double blind process as neither the reviewers nor the authors are exposed to each other. However, and in rare cases, authors may suggest favored and non-favored reviewers during the process of submission. Nevertheless, the final selection of reviewers is undertaken by the editorial board of SDJ.

Our reviewers are not allowed to reveal themselves to the authors. Authors should inform the editor if the reviewer identifies him or herself to the author.

Peer review process

The peer review process is a method of identifying the quality of the article accepted for publication, in order to guarantee the high quality of the articles submitted and accepted for publishing. SDJ accepts articles not only based on the scientific validity and the originality of the manuscript, other factors are also considered such as the standard of innovation and the significance of the knowledge included in the paper against other accepted articles.

The Peer review process starts with the following steps

1- The first filter is performed by the editorial board and involves checking the submitted article for originality, specialty − as some papers can fall into more than one specialty. Furthermore, some papers require modifications or correction according to SDJ guidelines and instructions for authors before the peer review process starts.

2- Then the editor selects two reviewers who are usually experts in the particular field, and often a statistician is consulted about the quality of statistical analysis used in the article. Sometimes, when the editor is not satisfied with the statistical method applied in the submitted article, the editor advises the author to consult a statistician about the statistical methods applied in his/her article.

3- The submitted article receives one of the following decisions from the Journal: accepted submission – the submission will be accepted without revisions. Revision required – the article would be accepted after minor changes. Resubmit for review – the paper requires major work. Declined submission – the paper will not be published with SDJ.

4- The corresponding author can appeal via an email to the editorial office if he/she is convinced of the scientific value of his manuscript.

The SDJ editorial board provides a quick decision and publication under an affective editorial mechanism that is considered valuable to both our authors and the scientific community. We ask our reviewers to respond with the revision outcome within the number of days agreed. If the reviewer for any reason is expecting an unusual delay in the revision process, we ask them to inform us in order to inform the author about any expected delay and if necessary to change the reviewer. 

After Acceptance of proofs

SDJ editors read the reviewers’ comments and suggested corrections and then send the work back as one set of page proofs   to the corresponding author via an email. The corresponding author should make the required amendments and return the manuscript to the journal in one submission within two weeks. This will be the final amendment; no major amendments to the manuscript will be accepted afterwards.

Authors are exclusively responsible for proof reading; hence, if the manuscript requires proof reading, SDJ editorial board will send the manuscript to a proof reader and the author will be charged for that.