Peer Review Policy

This policy applies to all Ital Publication journals. Each journal’s website holds the authoritative version and publishes its own editorial timelines.

Double-blind peer review

All Ital Publication journals use double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know who the authors are, and authors do not know who the reviewers are. Every author receives a fair, unbiased assessment. Acceptance is never guaranteed, and decisions are based only on scholarly merit, never on fees, waivers or any commercial consideration.

The review process

1. SubmissionThe author submits online through the journal’s website.
2. Initial screeningThe editorial office checks scope, completeness, the Author Guidelines, ethics statements and text similarity (iThenticate). Manuscripts that fail may be returned or rejected without external review.
3. Editorial assessmentThe Editor-in-Chief or the responsible Associate Editor assesses fit and scientific merit and decides whether to send the manuscript for review. The handling editor must have no competing interest with the authors.
4. External reviewAt least two independent external experts review the manuscript and any supplementary material.
5. Recommendation and decisionThe handling editor recommends acceptance, minor revision, major revision or rejection. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision.
6. RevisionAuthors revise and send a point-by-point response. The revised manuscript normally returns to the original reviewers.
7. Acceptance and publicationAccepted articles are typeset, assigned a DOI and published open access. Received, revised and accepted dates appear on each article.

How reviewers are chosen

• The handling editor selects reviewers with relevant expertise, based on their publication record. Reviewers must declare any competing interests.
• Authors may suggest reviewers, but suggested reviewers are never the only reviewers of a manuscript, and their identity, affiliation and institutional email address are verified independently.
• Editorial board members may review only when they take no part in the decision on that manuscript.

Special cases

Papers by editors

Manuscripts by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, board members or guest editors are handled by an independent editor, and the author takes no part in any stage of the process for that paper.

Special issues

Special issue papers go through the same double-blind review by at least two external reviewers. Guest editors make recommendations; the Editor-in-Chief makes all final decisions. Papers by a guest editor are handled by an editor outside the special issue and may not exceed 25% of its papers.

Letters to the Editor

Assessed by the Editor-in-Chief and at least one external reviewer. When a letter discusses a published article, its authors are invited to reply. Each published letter states the type of review it received.

Editorials

Not peer reviewed.

Responsibilities of reviewers

Reviewers follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. They are expected to:

• accept only invitations for which they have the expertise and can meet the deadline, and suggest alternative reviewers when they decline;
• declare any potential competing interest and decline if a conflict exists;
• treat the manuscript and all related material as confidential, and not share, cite or use it before publication;
• not upload the manuscript, or any part of it, to generative AI tools or other external services;
• not contact the authors or try to identify them, and not pass the invitation to anyone else without the editor’s permission;
• write an objective, constructive and timely report in English with a recommendation to the editor;
• recommend only relevant references, and never ask authors to cite the reviewer’s own work or the journal to increase citations;
• tell the editor about any suspected misconduct, including if they know the manuscript is under consideration elsewhere;
• review revised versions when asked.

What reviewers assess

Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers treat every manuscript as confidential. Reviewer identities are never disclosed to authors. Unpublished material from a manuscript is never used for anyone’s own research without the authors’ written consent.

Appeals

Authors who believe a decision was unfair can appeal, as described in the complaints and appeals policy.

Last updated October 2026.