Author Appeals Policy

Author Appeals Policy

ACADEMIA International Journal of Clinical & Translational Health (AIJCTH)

At AIJCTH, we are committed to a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. We recognize that authors may occasionally have legitimate concerns regarding editorial decisions. This Author Appeals Policy outlines a structured, ethical framework for submitting and reviewing appeals, ensuring integrity, objectivity, and respect for scholarly standards in clinical and translational research publishing.

1. Valid Grounds for Appeal

Authors may file an appeal if they believe the editorial decision was affected by one or more of the following:

  • A misinterpretation or misunderstanding of the manuscript’s content, data, or conclusions

  • Factual inaccuracies in reviewer comments or editorial assessments

  • Evidence suggesting bias, conflict of interest, or a violation of editorial procedures

⚠️ Appeals must be evidence-based. General disagreements with reviewer opinions, without clear justification, do not constitute valid grounds for appeal.

2. Submitting an Appeal

Timeframe

Authors must submit their appeal within 20 calendar days of receiving the editorial decision. Appeals submitted after this deadline will only be considered under exceptional circumstances.

How to Submit

Appeals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief via the official contact form on the AIJCTH website. A valid appeal must include:

  • A formal appeal letter outlining the grounds for the appeal

  • A point-by-point response to reviewer/editorial comments

  • Supporting evidence or clarification (e.g., data, figures, citations)

  • (Optional) A revised version of the manuscript with tracked changes if improvements are being proposed

3. Appeal Review Process

Initial Editorial Review

The Editor-in-Chief will review the original submission, reviewer reports, and the appeal documentation. Feedback may be sought from the original handling editor or another senior member of the editorial team.

Further Evaluation (If Required)

Depending on the nature of the appeal, the Editor-in-Chief may:

  • Consult independent reviewers not involved in the original decision

  • Seek clarifications from the original reviewers

  • Request internal evaluation by an Editorial Board Member

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief will issue a final, binding decision, which may result in:

  • Upholding the original decision

  • Inviting a revised resubmission

  • Accepting the manuscript, with or without additional revisions

A written explanation will be provided to the corresponding author, detailing the rationale behind the decision.

4. Appeal Limitations

  • Only one appeal is allowed per manuscript

  • Appeals are assessed strictly based on scientific merit, not on insistence or repeated inquiries

  • Frivolous or abusive appeals may result in submission bans or blacklisting

5. Ethical Considerations

If the appeal includes allegations of editorial misconduct, reviewer bias, or conflicts of interest, the matter will be escalated to the AIJCTH Ethics Committee for formal review. Possible outcomes include:

  • Reassigning the manuscript to another editor or reviewers

  • A formal ethics investigation following COPE guidelines

  • Implementation of editorial process improvements or disciplinary action if misconduct is confirmed

6. Communication and Timelines

  • Acknowledgment: Authors will receive confirmation of appeal receipt within 5 business days

  • Response Time: A final decision will be communicated within 4 to 8 weeks, depending on complexity

By maintaining a transparent and robust appeals process, AIJCTH ensures that authors are treated with fairness, professionalism, and academic respect—while upholding the journal’s standards of excellence and ethical publication practice.