Editorial process

The author submits a manuscript and it receives a tracking number (Manuscript ID).

An editor is assigned to the manuscript within two work days and an notice email will be sent to the authors via the system.

Plagiarism detection

Plagiarism is a serious issue in the world of academic publishing. Plagiarism is not only taking someone else’s work and using it as your own: there are different circumstances under which reproduced content can be considered “plagiarized”. We use a tool called iThenticate to scan every submission before peer review.

Initial manuscript evaluation

All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial team. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review.
Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will usually be informed within one weeks of receipt.

Peer review process

Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that confirms the validity of the science reported. Peer reviewers are experts who volunteer their time to help improve the journal manuscripts they review
Through the peer-review process, manuscripts should become:
More robust: Peer reviewers may point out gaps in your paper that require more explanation or additional experiments.
Easier to read: If parts of your paper are difficult to understand, reviewers can tell you so that you can fix them. After all, if an expert cannot understand what you have done, it is unlikely that a reader in a different field will understand.
More useful: Peer reviewers also consider the importance of your paper to others in your field and can make suggestions to improve or better highlight this to readers. Of course, in addition to offering authors advice, another important purpose of peer review is to make sure that the manuscripts published in the journal are of the correct quality for the journal’s aims. 

Our reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology and this journal uses double-blind peer review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. More about our editorial policies.

· The editor assigns potential reviewers to the manuscript and the author is notified.

· Reviewers agree to review the manuscript.

· Reviewers submit their reports to the editor.

· The editorial team discusses the reports and the editor makes the final decision. This process may involve further 

   consultation with the reviewers and editor-mediated communications between the reviewers.

· The editor contacts the author with the decision.

· If the decision is negative the author is given the opportunity to transfer their manuscript to another journal. If the 

   manuscript was peer reviewed the referee comments are also transferred.

Editorial & Production

Language Editing 
Layout editing 
Author Proofreading
Format Conversion

Current Issue

  • Volume 42, Issue 5