Review Process

The OSCM Journal is committed to a review process that upholds fairness, timeliness, and thoroughness. The following outlines the general editorial workflow:

• All submissions undergo a blind peer review. The Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor first evaluates the manuscript for suitability and scope. If deemed appropriate, the manuscript is assigned to reviewers for evaluation. Based on reviewer recommendations, the handling editor will reach a decision to accept, request revisions (minor or major), or reject the manuscript.
• Reviewers are requested to complete a structured review form provided by the journal. In some cases, reviewers may also provide extended comments in a supplementary document.
• The journal aims to reach a first decision within two to three months of submission. Desk rejections, based on editorial assessment prior to external review, are typically communicated sooner.

For manuscripts recommended for minor revisions, authors are normally given a maximum of two months to submit the revised version. For major revisions, a maximum of three months is allowed. Authors may request extensions when needed by contacting the handling editor. All revised submissions must be accompanied by a point-by-point response letter explaining how each reviewer concern has been addressed.