All submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the journal’s Editorial Office for compliance with guidelines for preparation of articles, the journal’s scope, standard guidelines, quality, novelty, and adherence to ethical issues. Articles that do not comply with the guidelines will be sent back to the authors.

The academic editor, i.e., the Editor-in-Chief in the case of regular submissions, or the Guest Editor in the case of Special Issue submissions, or an Editorial Board member in case of a conflict of interest and of regular submissions if the Editor-in-Chief allows, will be notified of the submission and invited to perform a check and recommend reviewers. Academic editors can decide to continue with the peer-review process, reject a manuscript, or request revisions before peer-review.

FBL require that editorial staff or editors not be involved in processing their own academic work. The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board. Submissions will be assigned to at least two independent outside reviewers. The submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process. Decisions will be made by other Editorial Board Members who do not have a conflict of interest with the author.

Guest Editors should not hold conflicts of interest with authors whose work they are assessing (e.g., from the same institution or collaborate closely). In this case, the Editor-in-Chief or a suitable Editorial Board member will make final acceptance decisions for submitted papers.

3. Peer-review

FBL adopts double-blind peer review. Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. FBL editors will check to make sure there are no conflicts of interest before contacting reviewers, and will not consider those with competing interests. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest before reviewing any submitted manuscript. For more information, see our Peer Review policy.

4. Author Revision

In cases minor revisions/Major revisions are recommended, the author is usually requested to revise the paper before referring to the academic editor the next round review. Articles may or may not be sent to reviewers after minor revision, which depends on whether the reviewer requested to see the revised version or not. The revised manuscript after major revision will be sent back to reviewers again. Normally (In general) we will allow no more than two rounds of major revision each manuscript. Any further revision needed will follow the decision of academic editor.

All reviewer comments should be responded point-by-point. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response or rebuttal.

5. Editor Decision

The acceptance of the manuscript will depend on the revisions made to the manuscript. Authors need to provide a point by point response or a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. The Acceptance or rejection decision will be made by academic editor after peer review. The academic editor can select from the following options: Accept in current form, accept with minor revisions, reject.

6. Author Appeals

FBL adheres to COPE guidelines regarding appeals to editorial decisions and complaints. The appeal must provide a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments.

The Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the reviewers) to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or another relevant Editorial Board member for consultation. The consulted editor will then be asked to provide an advisory recommendation on the manuscript, which may include recommending acceptance, inviting a resubmission, sending it to another external reviewer for further peer-review, or upholding the original rejection decision. The Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision. A rejection decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed. For more information, see our Appeals and Complaints policy.

7. Production

FBL carries out production on all manuscripts, including copy editing, layout and conversion to XML. Language editing is carried out by professional English editing editors. We recommend authors use EJEAR's English editing service prior to publication or during revisions. If you have used an alternative service, please provide a copy certificate to the Editorial Office.

The submitted, accepted and published dates will be shown in the PDF and XML/HTML files of the published articles, a digital object identifier (DOI) number will also be assigned for each published article. The submitted date is the date on which the editors received the original (or if previously rejected, the resubmitted) manuscript. The revised date is the date on which the editors received the final revision of manuscript. The accepted date is when the editor sends the acceptance letter. The published date is the earliest date that the final version-of-record is made available on the publisher's website.

8. Process for Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Post-Publication Survey: We welcome every scholar who has published an article in FBL to use survey questionnaire to provide suggestions for help optimizing our current shortcomings, enhancing communication with scholars, and improving the author experience.

Letter to the Editor: We welcome readers to submit ‘letters to the editors’ to FBL, providing a platform for constructive feedback, criticism, and discussion on published articles. The Editor-in-Chief will review these letters, and those approved along with important comments will be published of the journal, ensuring valuable insights are shared with the broader readership.

Online Comments: Although we do not monitor the internet or social media, we do pay attention to and follow up on clearly documented concerns that are directly brought to our attention from other platforms (by authors or relevant readers, whether named or anonymous).

Contact the Journal: In addition to the above methods, you can also provide feedback and complaints directly through the contact page of the journal.

When our team members receive feedback, we further communicate with the relevant parties to seek verification. If an issue is identified, our editorial staff follows COPE's procedures for handling it, seeking resolution advice from the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or another relevant Editorial Board member. The Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision. Necessary measures and policy improvements are made based on the specific circumstances, and training on guidelines is provided. We prioritize achieving the most beneficial outcomes for the scientific community over the quickest results. FBL strives to provide a better experience for every scholar and continuously optimize our current processes and technical facilities.

9. Publishing Standards and Report Guidelines

Submission of a manuscript to FBL implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

See more details about our journal’s guidelines and standards.

10. Ethical Standards

FBL follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.

Our journals follow COPE’s procedures for dealing with potentially unethical behavior by authors, reviewers or editors. FBL editorial staff are trained in how to detect and respond to potential ethical problems.

For more information, see our Publishing Ethics policy.

11. Editorial Independence

Editorial independence dictates that decision to accept or reject a manuscript is based on the scientific merit of the article but not to any other relations for example pressure from the publisher to the journal editor. This means that Editor is independent in his/her decision and will not be under pressure of any influential body or organization.

Our editorial policy is consistent with the principles of editorial independence presented by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

Updated on 31 May 2024

Front. Biosci. (Landmark Ed) Print ISSN 2768-6701 Electronic ISSN 2768-6698