1. Summary

The editorial process at the Global Clinical Engineering Journal ensures high standards of quality, fairness, and transparency in the publication of technology, engineering, and informatics related to health, wellness, disease management, and patient-care outcomes around the world. This process outlines key stages, from initial manuscript submission to final publication. To maintain credibility, the journal follows a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, offers an open peer review system, allows for author appeals, and adheres to strict publishing standards and ethical guidelines. The ultimate goal is to facilitate the dissemination of high-impact research that advances the field of clinical engineering.

2. Editorial Process Flowchart

1. Manuscript Submission
   • Authors submit their manuscripts via the online system.
2. Initial Editorial Check
   • Editor-in-Chief evaluates the scope, formatting, and ethical compliance.
3. Peer Review Process
   • Manuscript sent for double-blind peer review.
4. Author Revisions
   • Authors revise their manuscript based on review reports.
5. Final Decision
   • Editor-in-Chief decides to accept or reject.
6. Author Appeals (if applicable)
   • Authors can appeal the final decision if needed.
7. Copyediting & Proofreading
   • Manuscript edited for clarity, consistency, and grammar-checking.
8. Online First
   • Manuscript will be publishedonline first.
9. Final Publication
   • The entire issue will be released after all production work is finished.

3. Detailed Instructions

3.1 Manuscript Submission

• Initial Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts to the journal via the online portal (https://globalce.org/index.php/GlobalCE/about/submissions). Submissions must comply with the Global Clinical Engineering Journal’s Instructions for Authors and the journal’s scope, focusing on the field of clinical engineering, including technology, engineering, and informatics related to health, wellness, disease management, patient-care outcomes, etc.
• Prescreening Check: The manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the Editorial Team, who will check for compliance with submission guidelines and relevance to the journal’s scope. Ethical considerations are also reviewed, especially in research involving human or animal subjects. All manuscripts will be checked for similarity, and the Editorial Team might contact the authors for revision before processing it to the next stage.

3.2 Initial Editorial Check

• Preliminary Review: The Editor-in-Chief will evaluate the manuscript for scientific merit, novelty, and clarity. If the manuscript passes this review, it proceeds to peer review; if it does not meet the journal’s standards, it may be rejected at this stage.
• Decision on Peer Review: Manuscripts that meet the initial criteria are sent for peer review. If needed, the editorial team will also suggest reviewers based on the manuscript’s subject matter.

3.3 Peer Review Process

• Double-Blind Review: The manuscript will be reviewed by at least two experts in the field (sometimes the Editorial Board Member and Editor-in-Chief will review the manuscript). During the review process, both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for scientific rigor, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, and other aspects that are essential for publication quality.

  Key review criteria include:

  • Relevance and significance to the field of clinical engineering.
  • Scientific quality and methodological rigor.
  • Ethical considerations (e.g., patient consent, ethical approval).
  • Clarity and structure of the manuscript.
  • Originality and potential impact on the field.

3.4 Author Revisions

• Revisions: Authors will receive feedback from reviewers and are given the opportunity to revise their manuscript accordingly. Authors must provide a detailed response letter addressing each reviewer’s comment.  If authors disagree with a reviewer’s comment, they must explain in the response letter and justify their approach.
• Resubmission: Revised manuscripts are resubmitted through the online submission system for further review. If needed, the editor will send the manuscript back to the original reviewers for a second round of evaluation.

3.5 Final Decision

• Academic Decision: After the review process and author revisions, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection. If the manuscript meets the journal’s standards and the author has adequately addressed reviewer comments, it will be accepted for publication; if the manuscripts need further revision (the Editor-in-Chief proposes new comments or requests another round of review), the manuscript will be sent back to the authors for further improvement; if the manuscript’s overall quality fails to meet the standard of the Journal, and the Editor-in-Chief agrees that in the current stage, it’s hard for the authors to make a thorough revision, or their manuscripts have scientific errors, then a decision of rejection will be reached.
  • Accept: Manuscript accepted for publication.
  • Minor Revisions: Small changes are required before acceptance.
  • Major Revisions: Substantial changes needed for further consideration.
  • Decline: Manuscript rejected after peer review.

3.6 Author Appeals

• Appeals Process: If an author disagrees with the final decision, they may file an appeal (see GCEJ-Appeal Form). The appeal must be submitted within three months from the decision date, with a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ and/or Editor’s comments.
• Appeals Review: The appeal will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, and an alternative set of reviewers may be consulted if necessary. Please note that the Editor-in-Chief’s decision on the appeal is final and cannot be reverted.
• Grounds for Appeal: Authors may appeal on grounds of the following factors:potential discrepancies in the review process, unfair treatment, or whether the availability of new data might influence the decision.

3.7 Copyediting and Proofreading

• Copyediting: Once accepted, the manuscript will becopyedited by the in-house professionals to improve the overall quality, including language, clarity, grammar, and style. Authors will be requested for their approval in the event of substantial modifications.
• Proofreading: After copyediting, the manuscript will besent back to the authors for final proofreading and confirmation, which includes language and logic checking, tables/figures/equations modification checking, and other final formatting adjustments. The Editors might propose comments to help improve the quality or address unsolved issues, which need the authors’ support to revise or reply. Please note that, at this stage, no changes are allowed regarding the authorship, data, or any other important contents in the manuscript, to guarantee the publication ethics and ensure all the basic information and materials have been peer-reviewed.

3.8 Final Publication

• Online First: Papers that have been accepted and are currently undergoing layout production will be featured in the “Online First” section on the GCEJ homepage, making them accessible to the public prior to their inclusion in a formal journal issue.
• Issue Assignment: Once papershave been published online, they will be assigned to an appropriate issue in the next volume or issue of the Journal.
• Open Access: All papers published in GCEJ are open access, ensuring that they are freely accessible to readers worldwide, enhancing widespread dissemination and influence.

4. Publishing Standards and Guidelines

The Global Clinical Engineering Journal adheres to strict ethical guidelines and publishing standards to maintain the quality and integrity of its publications. These include:

• Ethical Supervision: All manuscripts must comply with the ethical standards, particularly concerning human and animal research. Authors are required to present compelling evidence of ethical approval for research involving human subjects or animal experimentation.
• Plagiarism Check: Manuscripts undergo plagiarism detection before being considered for publication. Any submission identified with substantial similarity to previously published content will be declined.
• Authorship: All authors must meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship. The corresponding authors are responsible for confirming that all listed authors in the manuscript have given their consent for inclusionand publication.
• Conflicts of Interest: Authors, reviewers, and editors are obligated to disclose any potential conflicts of interest during manuscript submission and, if applicable, throughout the review process.
• Data Availability: Authors are encouraged to deposit the data supporting their research in a publicly accessible repository, especially for studies incorporating clinical or patient

5. Editorial Ethics

The Global Clinical Engineering Journal is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards throughout the editorial process, which ensures that the peer review process is impartial, transparent, and free from bias. All involved parties, including editors, reviewers, and authors, are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

• Impartiality and Objectivity: All editorial decisions, including Manuscript Acceptance, Rejection, and Revisions, are grounded exclusively on scientific excellence and pertinence to the domain. Editors must ensure that personal relationships or professional interests will notaffect their objective decisions.
• Transparency: The journal promotes transparency in the editorial process by offering open peer review. All the review and manuscript processing steps will be recorded in the system, with different versions of manuscripts, review comments/reports, editor decisions, etc.
• Confidentiality: Editors and reviewers must uphold confidentiality throughout the editorial workflow. Manuscripts should not be shared with individuals external to the peer review procedure.
• Ethical Review: Authors are required to provide ethical approval for any studies involving human or animal participants, whichshould be explicitly stated in the manuscript. Research involving human subjects must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki, and authors must provide documentation of consent from participants (see GCEJ-Patient Consent Form).
• Conflictsof Interest: For editors and reviewers, this includes financial relationships, personal connections, or any other factors that could influence impartial decision-making. Authors should disclose conflicts related to funding sources, institutional affiliations, or personal relationships.
• Plagiarism and Research Misconduct: GCEJ maintains a strict stance against plagiarism and all types of research malpractice, such as data fabrication and falsification. Every manuscript submitted undergoes plagiarism screenings, and any potential misconduct is scrutinized meticulously. Authors proven to have engaged in misconduct will face rejection of their submissions and potential prohibition from submitting further work. Meanwhile, all editors must not get involved in helping authors conduct the above-mentioned misconduct, or falsify the research data.
• Responsibility for Research Integrity: The onus of upholding the integrity of the research lies with the authors. Authors are accountable for ensuring the precision and validity of the data and discoveries portrayed in their manuscripts.
• Corrections and Retractions: If errors are found in a published paper, either during or after the publication process, GCEJ is committed to issuing timely corrections or retractions. This may include Errata, Retractions, or Clarifications as necessary.

 

Download the Editorial Process for GCEJ