Editorial Process

Initial Editorial Screening

All manuscripts submitted to BMCS are first evaluated by the editorial office to determine whether they fall within the journal’s scope and comply with the journal’s submission guidelines and ethical policies. During this stage, manuscripts may be checked for completeness, formatting requirements, and potential ethical concerns, including plagiarism or duplicate submission.

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic submission requirements or fall outside the scope of the journal may be returned to the authors without external review.

If the manuscript passes this preliminary assessment, it is assigned to an appropriate Section Editor, who becomes responsible for managing the peer-review process.

Peer Review Process

For a manuscript to reach an editorial decision, at least two independent referee reports are required.

All participants involved in the evaluation process, including editors and reviewers, must be registered in the journal’s online submission system. If a suitable reviewer is not yet registered, it is the responsibility of the handling editor to create the reviewer’s account and send the review invitation through the system.

The standard peer-review model used by BMCS is the single-blind (blind) review system, where the identities of reviewers are hidden from the authors. However, the Section Editor may choose to conduct the evaluation under a double-blind review model, or authors may request a double-blind review model where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. For this purpose, the Section Editor may request that authors conceal their names and affiliations in the manuscript at the time of initial submission.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, mathematical correctness, clarity of presentation, relevance to the journal’s scope, and overall scientific contribution.

Revision Process

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Section Editor may request that the authors revise their manuscript. Authors are expected to address all reviewer comments carefully and provide a clear response explaining how each comment has been considered.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation if necessary. The revision process may involve minor revisions, major revisions, or additional rounds of review, depending on the nature of the reviewers’ recommendations.

Failure to submit a satisfactory revision within the specified timeframe may result in the withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript is made by the responsible Section Editor. The decision is based on the reviewers’ reports, the scientific merit of the manuscript, and the overall editorial assessment.

Possible editorial decisions include:

• Acceptance
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Rejection

Authors will be notified of the editorial decision through the journal’s submission system.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that their manuscript has been rejected based on a misunderstanding or procedural issue may submit a formal appeal to the editorial office. Appeals should provide a detailed explanation of the reasons for reconsideration and may include a response to the reviewers’ comments.

All appeals are reviewed carefully by the editorial team, and the journal reserves the right to seek additional independent evaluations if necessary. The decision following an appeal is considered final.

Ethical Commitment

BMCS is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and rigorous peer-review process in accordance with internationally recognized standards of scholarly publishing and publication ethics.