Editorial Policies
Peer Review Process
RELIEF follows a thorough, double-blind, peer review procedure, by external reviewers for all its research articles. The anonymity of authors and reviewers will be monitored with the utmost care.
Each contribution is first reviewed and broadly discussed by the editors. If it meets the general conditions of the journal, the article is then sent to two specialists for peer review. On the basis of the reviewers' responses, the editorial board then decides whether the contribution will be accepted, should be revised or will be rejected.
1. The editor-in-chief is responsible for the scientific quality of the journal and its objectives. The editorial board exists of at least three members including the editor-in-chief. Reviewers will be appointed by the editorial board and will be experts in the research areas of RELIEF.
2. Articles submitted to RELIEF will be received by the editorial assistant. He will send the author a return receipt. Afterwards, he will send the article to the other members of the editorial board.
3. The editors decide whether the contents and the quality of the article fall within the general scope of RELIEF. If not, the article will be rejected if the editors consider it not likely to be improved.
4. If the article is deemed admissible, it will enter the peer review process.
5. The editors choose two independent reviewers who are not affiliated with the same institution as the author of otherwise might have a conflict of interest. Then the editorial assistant sends out the article, always anonymously, and a review form.
6. Reviewers will write a report according to the agreed criteria and send their report to the editor-in-chief within four weeks.
7. The review reports will be considered by the editorial board; it is the editorial board that ultimately decides whether the article is publishable or non-publishable, or needs improvements.
8. The editor-in-chief notifies the author of the editorial decision and, in case of refusal or revision, transmits the reviewers’ comments. If necessary, the editor-in-chief can consult with the author to make the required corrections.
9. In case of revisions the author has the opportunity to submit the revised article again to RELIEF. The editor-in-chief sends the revised article to the editors (for minor corrections) or to the reviewers (in case of major corrections).
10. For this second revision cycle, editors, or reviewers will pass judgment within two weeks after receipt of the article.
11. The editorial board ultimately decides if the article will be accepted or rejected. This second cycle must be completed within a month after receiving the revised article.
12. In total, the first and the second revision should not take more than ten weeks.
13. If the author does not agree with the review procedure, he or she may at any time withdraw his or her article and submit it to another journal.
14. After the review process, the article enters the revision phase and finally enters the editorial phase. The editorial board retains the right to make minor corrections to the text once the article is accepted.
