Sri Lanka Dental Journal

SLDJ follows a double-blind peer-review process, in which each article is reviewed by two independent reviewers (names of the authors are not revealed to the reviewers and vice versa until the initial decision is made on the manuscript). The review will focus on the originality of the work, the scientific validity of the study and its findings, ethical conduct, and oral health implications. Reviewers comprise members of the Editorial Board including the members of the International Advisory Board, and local or international experts on specific content/field if required.

The two co-Editors are in charge of the peer-review process. Corresponding authors are requested to submit the manuscripts online using the Editorial Manager system (for more information, visit Submission Guidelines). When a manuscript is submitted to the SLDJ, it is initially assessed by the co-Editors on meeting the criteria for submission. If it does, the co-Editors will select two potential reviewers within the field of research and invite them to review independently and make recommendations in reviewers’ reports within two weeks of accepting the invitation to review. The editorial board will be meeting once a month (every third Thursday of the month), during which the recommendations made by the reviewers will be presented further, discussed, and finally, a decision will be made on the manuscript. Accordingly, the peer-review process until the first decision will usually take 2-6 weeks from the date of submission. Decisions include: ‘Rejection; no further review’ (Decline to publish), ‘Major revision’ (Resubmit for review), ‘Minor revision’ (Revision required), and ‘Accept’ (No further revisions)’.

If it is a re-submission, comments will be communicated to the corresponding author within one week of the meeting. Once received, the manuscript should be revised, while taking the reviewer’s comments into account. The revised manuscript is to be submitted online by the corresponding author within the next 4 weeks if it is a ’Major revision’, and within the next 2 weeks if it is a ‘Minor revision’. It should include a covering letter detailing the responses given to each reviewer comment in point-by-point form and be submitted online by the given deadline. The final decision will be made accordingly and communicated to the corresponding author. If the corresponding the author does not respond to three reminders sent by the Editorial Office after the deadline, the manuscript will be automatically removed from the system and will not be considered for further evaluation.