Editorial Screening
Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to verify its compliance with the journal’s aims and scope, editorial requirements, and basic standards of scientific quality. At this stage, all submissions are also screened for originality using the iThenticate (Similarity Check) system to detect potential plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
Selection of Independent Reviewers
Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers affiliated with institutions other than those of the authors. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their scientific expertise and its relevance to the subject matter of the submitted manuscript.
Single-Blind Peer Review
CMMS follows a single-blind peer review model, in which reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, while the authors remain unaware of the reviewers’ identities. To ensure transparency, the journal publishes an annual list of all reviewers who have contributed during the year, without linking individual reviewers to specific manuscripts.
Prevention of Conflicts of Interest
Before accepting a review assignment, each reviewer is required to declare the absence of any conflict of interest, including but not limited to:
- direct personal relationships with the authors;
- participation in joint research projects with the authors;
- professional, legal, or supervisory relationships;
- any other circumstances that could compromise the objectivity or impartiality of the review.
Evaluation of Scientific Quality
Reviews are conducted through the journal’s electronic editorial system (OJS) and include both qualitative comments and quantitative evaluation. Reviewers assess, in particular:
- originality of the research and findings;
- scientific significance and contribution to the advancement of the discipline;
- methodological soundness of the research;
- quality of data analysis and interpretation of results;
- clarity of presentation and language quality;
- consistency with the aims and scope of the journal.
Editorial Recommendations
Upon completing the review, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:
- Accepted Submission – accept the manuscript without revisions;
- Request Revisions – minor revisions required without further peer review;
- Resubmit for Review – major revisions required, followed by a new round of peer review;
- Decline Submission – reject the manuscript;
- Resubmit Elsewhere – recommend submission to another journal because the manuscript falls outside the scope of CMMS.
Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account the reviewers’ recommendations and the results of the editorial assessment. Where revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript together with a detailed response to all reviewer comments. If substantial revisions are required, the revised manuscript may be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation.