Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Food Nutrition Chemistry (FNC) are undergone a stringent peer review process which aims to uphold the high quality of papers published in Food Nutrition Chemistry and ensure the truthful and accurate reporting of the research work.

  • Upon submission, articles are reviewed by each journal’s Managing Editor, who checks for originality using Crossref Similarity Check (powered by iThenticate). Only original works complying with the editorial policy and procedural guidelines are passed to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) for initial review.
  • The EIC carefully evaluates each manuscript to determine if its topic and content are suitable for consideration.
  • Qualified manuscripts are then assigned by the EIC to an academic editor (one of Editorial Board Members) according to his or her respective areas of expertise.
  • The academic editor invites external-independent reviewers who are suitably qualified to assess the paper.
  • Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodology, contribution to the literature, presentation of results and support for the conclusion, and appropriate referencing of previous relevant studies.
  • Post-evaluation by the reviewers, the manuscript is sent to the EIC, who makes one of the following recommendations: Accept, Accept with Minor Revisions, Re-review after Major Revisions, or Reject.
  • If the EIC proposes to accept with no changes required by the authors, the manuscript will be handed over to the production team.
  • If the EIC proposes to accept with minor revisions, authors have up to 7 days to revise and resubmit the manuscript.
  • If the EIC proposes to re-review after major revisions, authors have up to 14 days to edit and resubmit the manuscript.
  • If the EIC proposes to reject, the manuscript will be rejected outright and the author will be notified of the decision.

 

Appeal

Authors with rejected submission are suggested to make an appeal in writing to fnc@usp-pl.com in which specific reasons for the appeal and detailed response to the reviewers’ suggestions are included.