Guides for Editors and Reviewers

These guidelines set out the composition, responsibilities, and working practices of the Editorial Board, Editors-in-Chief, and reviewers of journals published by EUROKD European Knowledge Development Institute (“the Publisher”). They are grounded in the core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and are informed by the guidance of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (jointly developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME). All editors and reviewers are expected to be familiar with, and act in accordance with, these frameworks.

1. The Editorial Board

2. Roles and Responsibilities of the Editors-in-Chief

3. Duties of Editors and Editorial Board Members

4. Responsibilities Toward Authors

5. Responsibilities Toward Reviewers

6. Responsibilities Toward Readers and the Scientific Community

7. Guidelines for Reviewers

  

1. The Editorial Board

1.1 Composition

The Editorial Board consists of international experts qualified in the fields covered by the journal’s scope. Members are affiliated with recognized educational and research institutions and are expected to adhere to the Code of Conduct for Journal Editors throughout their tenure.

1.2 Roles of Editorial Board members

Editorial Board members are expected to:

• Provide subject-matter expertise in their designated research field(s).
• Evaluate submitted manuscripts and engage independent reviewers in the assessment process.
• Advise on journal policy, scope, and strategic development.
• Propose topics and conference partnerships for special issues, and serve as guest editors where appropriate.
• Promote the journal at conferences, seminars, workshops, and other relevant professional events.
• Help attract new potential authors and reviewers to the journal.

Guest editors play a specific role in overseeing special content (e.g., Special Issues), from initial proposal through to final publication, and are expected to uphold the same standards of quality and integrity as the standing Editorial Board.

1.3 Renewal of the Board

The composition of the Editorial Board is reviewed on a regular basis (at least every two years). Inactive members are excluded, and new members are invited to join by way of a formal invitation letter, ensuring the Board remains active and representative of the journal’s evolving scope.

1.4 Applying to join the Editorial Board

Researchers wishing to be considered for Editorial Board membership may apply directly by sending an email to the Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor of the relevant journal, together with a CV including:

• Current position, affiliation, and education;
• Scope of scientific interest and activities;
• List of publications;
• List of journals for which the applicant serves as editor or reviewer;
• A contact email and a link to a personal/institutional profile page.

Applications are carefully reviewed, and candidates are informed of the outcome by email. New members are selected on the basis of their research standing in the fields relevant to the journal, and their genuine readiness and capacity to contribute to editorial activities.

2. Roles and Responsibilities of the Editors-in-Chief

The Editors-in-Chief hold overarching responsibility for the journal and owe duties to authors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, readers and the scientific community, the Publisher, and the public. In particular, the Editors-in-Chief must:

• Communicate to Editorial Board members their expected functions and duties — including supporting and promoting the journal, encouraging submissions, and participating as external reviewers — and keep them informed of any changes to editorial policy.
• Consult regularly with Editorial Board members, taking into account their suggestions for improving editorial policy and processes.
• Take into account all reasonable opinions and suggestions offered by authors, reviewers, Board members, readers, co-founders, the Publisher, and representatives of the wider expert and scientific community.
• Ensure that submitted manuscripts are decided upon fairly, with Editorial Board members consulted as needed in reaching a publication decision.

3. Duties of Editors and Editorial Board Members

All journal editors are strongly encouraged to follow COPE, WAME, and ICMJE practices, and to follow the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 

3.1 Fair play

Manuscripts must be evaluated on their merits — importance, originality, validity, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope — without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.

3.2 Confidentiality

Editors, Editorial Board members, and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the Publisher, and only for legitimate editorial purposes.

3.3 Disclosure and conflicts of interest

• Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s express written consent.
• Editors must refrain from handling any manuscript where a conflict of interest arises from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, or with companies or institutions connected to the manuscript.

3.4 Ethical stewardship

Editors should maintain and promote consistent ethical policies, support the reduction of academic misconduct, and ensure that authors, reviewers, and Board members are adequately informed about publishing ethics and journal policy. Editors should promote fairness, impartiality, and timeliness in applying the journal’s publishing policy.

4. Responsibilities Toward Authors

Editors and Editorial Board members should:

• Treat all authors honestly, politely, objectively, and transparently.
• Respect authors’ intellectual property rights.
• Ensure the timely review and publication of accepted manuscripts, and keep authors informed of editorial standards and policy changes.
• Provide clear instructions and recommendations on manuscript preparation and submission, and periodically review the “Instructions for Authors” published on the journal website.
• Monitor compliance with the journal’s authorship criteria.
• Maintain an effective, honest, and transparent review system staffed by qualified reviewers, and work continuously to improve it.
• Remain alert to real or apparent conflicts of interest among any participants in the editorial process, ensuring they are avoided or, where unavoidable, properly disclosed and managed.

5. Responsibilities Toward Reviewers

Editors and Editorial Board members should:

• Adhere to COPE principles when organizing manuscript review and working with reviewers.
• Match reviewers’ expertise and scientific interests to the subject matter of the manuscript.
• Accept a reviewer’s decline gracefully, with the expectation of future cooperation.
• Safeguard the independence and transparency of the review process.
• Answer reviewers’ questions about editorial procedures.
• Agree on a reasonable review timeframe with each reviewer, and monitor adherence to the deadlines published on the journal website.
• Respect reviewers’ professional judgment and opinions.
• Encourage reviewers to consider ethics and potential research misconduct when assessing manuscripts.
• Maintain and regularly refresh a pool of qualified external reviewers whose expertise matches the journal’s thematic scope.
• Discontinue cooperation with reviewers who deliver low-quality reviews, repeatedly miss deadlines, or breach publication ethics or policy.

6. Responsibilities Toward Readers and the Scientific Community

Editors and Editorial Board members should:

• Work continuously to raise the journal’s quality in line with international publishing best practice.
• Publish only accurate information about Editorial Board members, external reviewers, and the journal’s ethics and policies.
• Encourage the publication of scientifically valuable, interesting content.
• Present print and online editions in an accessible, reader-friendly format.
• Avoid publishing manuscripts containing unreliable or unethical content, or undisclosed conflicts of interest.
• Ensure impartiality and transparency in the review system.
• Maintain the journal’s publication schedule.
• Guarantee continuous, open access to published article content.
• Respond appropriately to reader complaints and suggestions.
• Promote the journal’s distribution through library aggregators and indexing services.
• Maintain high-quality content and the uninterrupted functioning of the journal website.

7. Guidelines for Reviewers

EUROKD recognizes that an effective, rigorous peer-review process is central to the credibility of every journal it publishes. Reviewers are asked to familiarize themselves with, and act in accordance with, the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and to provide accurate, verifiable personal and professional information (including affiliation and contact details) when agreeing to review.

7.1 Confidentiality

• Reviewers must not discuss a manuscript under review with anyone without the Editor’s specific permission.
• A reviewer may seek input from one or two colleagues, but only with the Editor’s explicit prior permission; any such colleague (name and affiliation) must be disclosed in the Comments to the Editor.
• Reviewers must not copy, disseminate, or otherwise share manuscript content for any purpose, including the advancement of their own research.
• Any request for clarification directed to the author(s) should be routed through the Comments section of the Referee Report.

7.2 Objectivity

Reviews must be objective and constructive. All comments and recommendations should be substantiated with clear, relevant argument, expressed respectfully.

7.3 Timeliness

• Reviewers should respond to review invitations within a reasonable timeframe.
• Reviewers should only accept an invitation if they can realistically deliver the report within the proposed or agreed deadline.
• If circumstances threaten timely delivery, the reviewer must contact the handling editor immediately rather than allow the deadline to pass silently.

7.4 Conflicts of interest

• Reviewers must remain unbiased regardless of authors’ nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender, or other personal characteristics, and irrespective of commercial considerations.
• Reviewers must disclose any competing interest that could bias their review — including financial interests in publication or non-publication, recent or ongoing collaboration with the authors, or a history of dispute with them.
• An invitation must be declined if the reviewer currently shares an institution with any author, or has, within the past three years, been their mentor, mentee, close collaborator, or joint grant holder.
• Reviewers must not accept an invitation merely to gain early sight of a manuscript without genuine intention to submit a report.
• Having previously reviewed an earlier version of a manuscript for another journal does not preclude reviewing it again, but this history must be disclosed in the Comments to the Editor.

We strongly recommend that our reviewers are familiar with and follow COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

These guidelines are reviewed periodically by the Publisher, EUROKD European Knowledge Development Institute, in line with evolving best practice from COPE, WAME, ICMJE, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and are subject to update accordingly.