Editorial Process

Having taken the time to read our formatting guidelines and ethics/policies, we're looking forward to receiving your submission.

Summary of the Editorial Process

  • The author submits their article via the EBD online submission portal.
  • The Editorial Office performs an initial quality check of the submission to ensure that the article is formatted correctly.
  • The manuscript receives a tracking number and the Editor then decides whether or not to send the manuscript out to review - decisions on Comments and Book Reviews are often made without external peer review; Systematic Reviews and Methodology articles which are deemed to be in scope and of sufficient quality are nearly always sent out for external peer review before an editorial decision is made.
  • If the decision is not to send the manuscript for peer review, the Editor contacts the author with the decision.
  • If the Editor decides the paper is within the journal's remit, external peer reviewers are selected and assigned. This can take some time depending on the responsiveness and availability of the reviewers selected.
  • Reviewers are given 21 days from acceptance to submit their reports. Once the required reports are submitted, the Editor will make a final decision based on the comments received.
  • With Special Issues, the articles are externally peer reviewed (reviewers invited by the Editor) and the decision-making process is handled by the Editor.

You will be able to monitor the status of your manuscript online throughout the editorial process.

Peer Review

The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:

  • Identity transparency: Single anonymised
  • Reviewer interacts with: Editor
  • Review information published: None

Further information regarding our peer review process can be found in our 'For referees' section.  

Manuscripts sent out for peer review are evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers. Authors are welcome to suggest independent reviewers to evaluate their manuscript. All recommendations are considered, but the choice of reviewers is at the Editor’s discretion. To expedite the review process, only papers that seem most likely to meet editorial criteria are sent for external review. Papers judged by the Editor to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review.

The Editor will then make a decision based on the reviewers' evaluations. Available decision terms are outlined below:

  • Accept – with or without editorial revisions
  • Revise (Minor/Major Revision) – with the author addressing concerns raised by the reviewers before a final decision is reached.
  • Reject – but with comments and suggestions for improvements from the reviewers (and sometimes the Editor) included.

Submission of Revisions

Authors submitting a revised manuscript after review are asked to include the following:

  1. A rebuttal letter, indicating point-by-point how you have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers. If you disagree with any of the points raised, please provide adequate justification in your letter. 
  2. A marked-up version of the manuscript which highlights changes made in response to the reviewers' comments in order to aid the Editor to see where changes were made.
  3. A 'clean' (non-highlighted) version of the manuscript

If the Editor feels further edits are necessary, the paper may be sent back to review or the authors may be asked to submit a further revision. If the Editor is satisfied that the reviewer comments have been addressed and the paper is ready for publication, the manuscript will be accepted and the authors will receive an ‘Accept’ decision with further instructions on submitting a signed Licence to Publish form (plus any other editorial requests). Failure to complete the form will result in delay of publication. Authors grant Springer Nature an exclusive licence to publish, in return for which they can re-use their papers in their future printed work. Springer Nature’s author licence page provides details of the policy.

Post-acceptance

Once a manuscript is accepted, it will be typeset and the corresponding author will receive a proof of their Systematic Review to check over. Once this has been returned and any corrections have been processed, the paper will be ready to publish online. EBD Systematic Reviews are published under the standard Licence to Publish behind a paywall. Readers will be able to access these manuscripts through their institutional or personal subscriptions or on a pay-per-view basis.