Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process:

 The Benha Journal of Applied Science follows a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure the integrity, quality, and relevance of the manuscripts it publishes. The review process adheres to the principles of fairness, objectivity, and confidentiality to uphold the highest standards of academic publishing.

  1. Submission and Initial Screening

Manuscripts submitted through the journal's official website are first received and screened by the Editor-in-Chief. At this stage, the manuscript undergoes a preliminary evaluation to ensure it meets the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the scope of the journal.
  • Originality and scientific merit of the content.
  • Adherence to journal formatting and submission guidelines.
  • Clarity of language and writing style.
  • Plagiarism is verified through advanced plagiarism detection tools (e.g., iThenticate).

Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected outright.

  1. Assignment to Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are forwarded to two expert reviewers for evaluation. The review process adheres to the double-blind peer-review system, where:

  • The identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other, ensuring impartiality and objectivity.
  • Reviewers are carefully selected based on their expertise and familiarity with the subject area of the manuscript.

The journal strives for a global perspective in its peer review process by assigning one reviewer from Egypt and another from a foreign country, thereby ensuring diverse insights and adherence to international academic standards.

  1. Criteria for Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the following key aspects:

  • Scientific merit: Originality, validity, and significance of the research question or hypothesis.
  • Methodological rigor: Appropriateness of study design, methodology, and statistical analyses.
  • Data integrity: Accuracy, transparency, and reproducibility of results.
  • Clarity and coherence: Quality of writing, logical flow, and clarity in presenting findings.
  • Ethical considerations: Compliance with ethical standards, especially when involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data.
  1. Decision Process

After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief carefully evaluates the recommendations and makes a final decision. The possible outcomes include:

  • Acceptance: If the manuscript meets all academic and ethical standards and requires no or minor revisions.
  • Minor Revisions: When minor improvements are needed to enhance clarity or presentation.
  • Major Revisions: If substantial issues need to be addressed, such as methodological flaws or missing critical information.
  • Rejection: If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s criteria for quality, originality, or relevance.

In cases where the two reviewers’ recommendations differ significantly (e.g., one recommends acceptance while the other recommends rejection), the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer for an additional evaluation. The decision is then made based on the third reviewer’s report and the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion.

  1. Communication with Authors

Authors are promptly notified of the decision, accompanied by constructive feedback from reviewers. The journal encourages authors to address the reviewers’ comments thoroughly and resubmit revised manuscripts within the specified timeframe for reconsideration.

  1. Final Decision and Publication

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. Accepted manuscripts are subjected to the following:

  • Final proofreading and formatting to align with the journal’s style.
  • Copyediting for grammatical and typographical accuracy.
  • Assignment to the appropriate issue for publication.
  1. Confidentiality and Transparency

The Journal ensures that all aspects of the peer review process remain confidential. Reviewers are required to the following:

  • Treat all manuscripts as privileged information.
  • Refrain from sharing or discussing the content with anyone outside the review process.
  • Provide unbiased and constructive feedback without personal or professional bias.

The journal also follows COPE guidelines for managing conflicts of interest, ethical concerns, and reviewer misconduct.

 Commitment to High-Quality Peer Review:

 The journal is committed to the following:

  • Maintaining a rigorous, unbiased, and transparent review process.
  • Providing timely feedback to authors while ensuring thorough evaluation.
  • Promoting the publication of high-quality, impactful, and ethically sound research.

The journal acknowledges the critical role of reviewers in the publication process and values their expertise and contributions, which are fundamental to maintaining its scientific integrity

.Acknowledgments and Permissions

  • Include acknowledgments for contributors and funding agencies.
  • Provide written permission for any reused material.

Revised manuscripts

The revised manuscripts should have textual content in a single file, prepared using Microsoft Word. We do not accept PDF files for the revised manuscripts.

  • Format the manuscript file without justification.
  • Number the pages via an Arabic numeral in the footer of each page.
  • Use the 'symbols' font for any Greek characters.
  • Supply any figures as individual files.
  • Supply any Supplementary Information as a separate file, preferably in PDF format, and include the title of the manuscript and author list on the first page of the Supplementary Information file.
  1. Peer Review Process

BJAS follows a double-blind peer-review process to ensure unbiased evaluation:

  1. Manuscripts are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief for scope, originality, and quality.
  2. Accepted manuscripts are sent to at least two independent (an Egyptian and an international) reviewers.
  3. If reviewers’ opinions diverge, the manuscript will be sent to a third reviewer.
  4. The Editor-in-Chief  and Managing editor makes the final decision based on reviewers’ feedback.
  1. Post-Acceptance Process
  1. Proofreading: Authors will receive galley proof for review and approval.
  2. Publication Timeline: Articles are published online within 21 days of acceptance.
  3. Open Access: BJAS articles are freely accessible online, ensuring maximum visibility.
  1. Article Processing Charges (APC)

BJAS operates under an open-access model. Authors may be required to pay an APC to cover reviewing, editorial, and production costs.

 

Egyptian Authors with an accepted manuscript should pay manuscript handling/processing charges (a sum of 2500 EGP), whereas foreign authors have to pay US$200. Details of the APC are available on the journal website (Author Guidelines).