Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are entrusted with safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. Their responsibilities include:

• Initial Assessment: Reviewing submitted manuscripts for relevance, originality, and alignment with the scope of APCR before initiating peer review.
• Reviewer Selection: Identifying qualified reviewers with relevant expertise while ensuring diversity and minimizing conflicts of interest.
• Decision-Making: Making impartial decisions based on the merits of the work, reviewer reports, and editorial judgment.
• Ethical Oversight: Ensuring manuscripts comply with ethical standards, including human/animal research approvals, patient consent, and conflict of interest disclosures.
• Communication: Providing clear, constructive, and respectful feedback to authors, reviewers, and fellow editors.
• Confidentiality: Maintaining confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and associated correspondence throughout the process.

Editorial Workflow

The editorial workflow is designed to ensure manuscripts are processed efficiently, fairly, and with academic rigor:

1. Submission Triage: Editors screen new submissions for basic compliance with journal scope, formatting, and ethical declarations.
2. Peer Review Coordination: Suitable manuscripts are sent for double-blind peer review, typically to two or more independent experts.
3. Review Evaluation: Editors evaluate reviewer comments for clarity, constructiveness, and appropriateness before relaying to the authors.
4. Editorial Decision: Based on peer review and editorial judgment, manuscripts may be accepted, revised, or rejected.
5. Revisions: Editors ensure that authors address reviewer concerns adequately and verify corrections in revised submissions.
6. Final Acceptance: The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editor approves manuscripts for publication after all requirements are satisfied.

Maintaining Fairness and Impartiality

Editors must ensure fairness and impartiality in all decisions. Key principles include:

• Decisions must be free from personal bias, professional rivalry, or external influence.
• Manuscripts should be evaluated solely on their academic merit, not on the authors’ nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or funding source.
• Conflicts of interest—financial, institutional, or personal—must be declared and managed. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts exist.
• Confidentiality must be preserved throughout the review process, ensuring privacy and intellectual property protection for authors.

Ethical Considerations for Editors

Editors serve as custodians of ethics in publishing. Responsibilities include:

• Ensuring adherence to guidelines for ethical research involving humans and animals.
• Verifying authors’ disclosures regarding funding and conflicts of interest.
• Actively identifying potential ethical concerns such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, or inappropriate authorship.
• Working with the publisher and relevant institutions to address allegations of misconduct promptly and fairly.

Handling Misconduct

Editors must respond decisively to suspected misconduct:

• Plagiarism: Editors should employ plagiarism detection tools and investigate suspected overlap thoroughly.
• Duplicate Publication: Submissions must be original; redundant publications must be identified and addressed.
• Data Integrity: Suspicious or unverifiable data must be flagged, and authors may be asked to provide raw datasets.
• Conflicts of Interest: Undisclosed conflicts should be investigated and corrected through disclosure or corrigenda.

Supporting Diversity and Inclusion

Editors should foster diversity and inclusion across the editorial process:

• Seek reviewers from diverse backgrounds and geographic regions to ensure varied perspectives.
• Encourage submissions from underrepresented groups and provide equitable opportunities for publication.
• Promote gender balance in reviewer selection and editorial board participation.

Transparency in Communication

Editors must ensure transparent, timely, and constructive communication:

• Communicate decisions promptly and provide reasons for rejection where possible.
• Relay reviewer feedback clearly, avoiding ambiguous or discourteous language.
• Encourage dialogue with authors for clarification and constructive engagement.

Continuous Professional Development

Editors are encouraged to pursue professional development:

• Stay updated with best practices in scholarly publishing and peer review.
• Attend editorial training workshops and conferences.
• Engage in regular review of editorial policies to ensure alignment with international standards.