Skip to content
Sign InCreate Account
otstest
Search
Peer Review

Peer Review Policy

otstest uses double-anonymous peer review. Publication timelines vary according to manuscript readiness, reviewer availability, revision requirements, and editorial workload.

Peer reviewISSN null

Peer Review Process

How submissions are screened, reviewed, and decided; publication timelines vary by manuscript readiness, reviewer availability, revision requirements, and editorial workload.

  1. 1

    Desk screening

    Editors conduct an initial screening for scope fit, methodological rigor, and ethical compliance before review.

  2. 2

    Editorial review

    Editors evaluate each submission and may seek independent review; the journal states its review model in its policies.

  3. 3

    Decision

    Editors issue a decision and outline revision guidance when applicable.

  4. 4

    Appeals

    Authors may appeal decisions within 30 days with a clear, evidence-based rationale reviewed by a senior editor.

Decision outcomes

  • Accept.
  • Minor Revision.
  • Major Revision.
  • Reject.

Detailed policy

Review process

otstest has not yet stated its peer-review model. Submissions are evaluated by the editors, who may seek independent review; the model will be stated here once the journal publishes it.

Publication timelines vary according to manuscript readiness, reviewer availability, revision requirements, and editorial workload.

Editorial screening and decision making

  • Editors may desk reject submissions that are out of scope, incomplete, insufficiently anonymised, previously published, ethically deficient, or not ready for review.
  • Authors may suggest reviewers, but the journal is not obliged to use them.
  • Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not determine it.
  • The handling editor or Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final editorial decision.

Confidentiality, conflicts, and special issues

  • Reviewers must treat manuscripts and review material as confidential.
  • Reviewers and editors must declare conflicts and decline or recuse themselves where needed.
  • Submissions from editors, board members, guest editors, or close associates are handled by an independent editor with no conflict of interest.
  • Special issue submissions follow the same review standards as regular submissions.

Appeals

Appeals should be sent to iwickens@gmail.com with an evidence-based rationale. Appeals should identify a procedural error, factual misunderstanding, or evidence that may have affected the decision.