Review Process


Manuscripts submitted to Mesford journals are reviewed by at least two experts. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the quality of the manuscript and to provide a recommendation on whether a manuscript can be accepted, requires revisions or should be rejected.

Peer-review of a submitted manuscript is conducted by keeping the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of reviewers in view. Manuscripts are forwarded for evaluation to Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and Editorial Board Members (EBMs) as well as external reviewers to check:

  • Originality/Novelty: Submitted manuscript should be original and have the quality to contribute in the respective field of research.
  • Significance: Results should be interpreted appropriately and significant. Conclusions must be justified and supported by the results.
  • Layout and format: Formatting of manuscript should be according to the Author Guidelines.
  • Interest to the Readers: Manuscript should fall within the scope of the journal.
  • English Level: The English language must be appropriate and understandable.
  • Overall Merit: Overall benefit of publishing the paper.

Overall Recommendation

Editors/EABMs may recommend the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript by conducting the peer-review themselves based on their own knowledge and experience, or they may take assistance and advice from other experts in the field. The peer review is completed once all the reviewers send a detailed report with their comments on the manuscript and their recommendation. The types of decisions are categorized below:

  • Accept as it is: The submitted manuscript is accepted in its original form. This type of decision outcome is rare.
  • Accept with minor revisions: The manuscript is accepted after revision based on minor revisions or corrections.
  • Accept after major revisions: The manuscript is accepted after major revisions. Authors are asked to make significant improvements and address flaws in the methodology; collect more data; conduct a more thorough analysis; or even adjust the research question to ensure the paper contributes something truly original to the body of work.
  • Revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): The journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes.
  • Reject the paper (outright rejection): The manuscript has serious flaws, and is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.

Changes in Review Reports

The Editorial staff relays the comments of the reviewers on behalf of the Editor-in-Chief. The review reports are edited by the Editor-in-Chief if the comments contain confidential information or these are written in a language not suitable for scholarly communication. Reviewers should include such comments in the confidential section of the review form, which is intended to be read by the editors only.

Timely Review

Reviewers are asked to provide review reports in a timely manner since a prompt review guides to the timely publication of a manuscript which is beneficial not only for the authors but for the scientific community as well.  Please contact the editorial office if you require an extension to the review deadline.

Reviewing Process Flow Chart 


Suite 2205, 350 Web Drive Mississauga Ontario L5B3W4, Canada

T: 647-472-2543

Mesford Publisher Inc is an independent academic publisher, it is registered and operated as a Ontario incorporation in Canada, the Ontario incorporation No is 002633517

© 2018 Mesford Publisher INC