Peer-review Policy

Editors and Editorial Board members, as well as Reviewers themselves, are encouraged to refer to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers which describe the basic principles and standards to which all Reviewers should adhere during the peer review process.

All manuscripts must be submitted online. The author will be guided through the online process, and be able to track the progress of the manuscript. 
For further details about the preparation of the files for submission, please see Submission Guidelines and   Author Guidelines.

The author who completes the submission will be designated as the corresponding author and will be responsible for handling communications with the Editorial Office of Pipeline Science and Technology (PST) . The corresponding author has full authority to speak for all other authors regarding withdrawal of a manuscript or correction or retraction of a published article.

All manuscripts submitted to PST for publication are double-blind peer-reviewed according to the following procedure:

Editorial Office Assessment: The Editorial Office will check whether the composition and format of the paper comply with the Author Guidelines and Submission Guidelines , to ensure it includes the required sections and styles. If the manuscript fails to meet one or more requirements, the Editorial Office will return it to the authors for amendments within one week. 

Peer Review: The manuscripts that pass the initial review are assigned to reviewers. Each paper undergoes evaluations by at least two reviewers of the respected field. The review process is conducted anonymously; PST does not reveal the identity of the reviewers to the authors and vice versa in order to implement the double blind peer-review process. Referees evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, content, soundness among others. The referees are asked to complete their reviews within one month. 

Recommendation: After assessment of the manuscript, one of the following recommendations is made:

1). Accepted; 

2). Accepted, with revisions;

3). Rejected, specifying the reason for rejections.

Authors may be asked by the Managing Editor at all times during the editorial process to revise a contribution in order to maintain scientific standards and comply with the journal’s author guidelines and submission guidelines.

To enable speedy handling of the manuscript, during the submission process the author must provide the names and e-mail addresses of at least three potential referees (note that the editor retains the sole right to decide whether or not to use the people suggested). The author may also exclude a limited number of researchers as potential reviewers of the manuscript (maximum three people).

The result of the review itself will be shared only with the corresponding author.