How to avoid delays in the review process of journals?

To prevent journal review delays, authors and journals must adopt rigorous practices to optimize submission quality and process efficiency. Adherence to ethical standards and active, timely participation throughout the review phase are fundamental. Implementing best practices significantly enhances the probability of a prompt review outcome. Key principles involve ensuring the manuscript’s novelty, clarity, and technical soundness, as poorly prepared submissions invite lengthy revision requests or desk rejection. Adhering strictly to the target journal’s scope, formatting guidelines, and ethical policies for authorship, data, and conflicts is mandatory. Authors must provide complete datasets, code if applicable, and accurate contact details for all suggested reviewers. Editors, in turn, must efficiently manage reviewer invitations and reminders, maintain clear communication channels, and utilize manuscript tracking systems effectively. Selecting appropriate reviewers known for their reliability and expertise minimizes unresponsive delays. Authors should meticulously prepare manuscripts before submission, including thorough proofreading, precise formatting according to journal guidelines, and verifying that all required elements (abstract, keywords, figures, cover letter, conflict disclosures) are included. They should propose relevant, independent, and active reviewers where permitted. Promptly responding to editorial requests, revisions, or reviewer queries without delay is essential. Post-submission, authors must respect journal communication timelines without unnecessary inquiries. These actions collectively ensure smoother peer review workflows, reducing bottlenecks and accelerating the dissemination of research.