Peer review involves subjecting the author’s scholarly work and research to the scrutiny of other experts in the same field to check its validity and evaluate its suitability for publication.

 

STEP 1: Authors submits manuscript

The submission of a manuscript via email (editorialoffice@cit.edu.al) confirms the intention of the author(s) to have it published in CIT REVIEW.

 

STEP 2: Journal Editor screens manuscript

All manuscripts submitted for publication must go through the review process. All manuscripts are initially treated by Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor to assess their compliance with the requirements of the journal and the subject. Incomplete manuscripts not prepared in the advised style will be sent back to author(s) with suggestions for correction. Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor reads the revised manuscript. If the manuscript is improved adequately, it is sent to one reviewer for review.

 

The Editor-in-Chief or assigned Editor reads every manuscript received and assigns a general priority level:

  • manuscripts sent to reviewers immediately;

(b) manuscripts returned to authors with suggestions for the correction of data presentation;

and

(c) rejected manuscripts.

 

STEP 3: Manuscript is Peer Reviewed

The review is performed in confidence. The reviewers are informed that manuscripts submitted to them are private property of authors and belong to privileged information. The reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the article for own needs. The reviewers and also the staff of the editorial office have no right to use knowledge about the content of the article before its publication for own benefit. Peer review takes 5 working days on average, although longer or shorter periods are sometimes seen owing to factors such as the time of year, your manuscript’s subject area, and the availability of reviewers.

 

STEP 4: Journal Editor-in-Chief/ editorial board decides whether to publish

The decision will be (i) to revise and resubmit your manuscript based on reviewer comment for re-evaluation, (ii) accept pending the authors adequately addressing reviewer and editor concerns, (iii) immediate acceptance without further revisions, or (iv) reject as the manuscript does not meet the journal’s acceptance criteria or, if the manuscript was a resubmission, because peer reviewer comments have not been adequately addressed.

 

STEP 4: Author is informed of decision

The editorial decision on your manuscript will be carried out by the journal’s Editor in Chief, or by a member of the journal’s Editorial Board. The decision will incorporate the peer reviewers’ comments into their decision. Once this is complete, the peer review report for your manuscript will be immediately sent to you.

If your paper is accepted subject to the authors making the changes described in the peer review report to the editorial decision-maker’s satisfaction, the final editorial decision is considered to be the one when the editorial decision-maker accepts the paper for publication. The decision-maker may request further changes before making a final decision to accept the paper for publication, and if authors repeatedly fail to respond to reviewers’ recommendations then the paper may be rejected at this stage. After the final editorial decision the paper will move into production after any applicable fees are paid.

For papers accepted by the editorial decision-maker immediately following peer review without any changes being required, this acceptance constitutes the final editorial decision and the paper moves into production after any applicable fees are paid.

If your paper is rejected then processing halts following the editorial decision. You may resubmit your paper to another journal if you wish. In some circumstances it may be possible to re-submit the manuscript if the recommendations made by the reviewers are first addressed. In this case your paper will be subject to peer review again.