Peer Review Process

Publication of articles in KING: Knowledge Integrated Networking for Global Sport and Health relies solely on scientific validity and coherence assessed by the editors and/or bestary partners, who will also assess whether the piece is comprehensible and whether it is a useful contribution to the field. KING: Knowledge Integrated Networking for Global Sport and Health appreciates the efforts and suggestions provided by the reviewers.

Initial evaluation of manuscripts

The editor will evaluate all submitted manuscripts within a maximum of 4 weeks. Although rare, it is possible that an outstanding manuscript will be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts that are rejected at this stage are those that lack originality, have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the purpose and scope of KING: Knowledge Integrated Networking for Global Sport and Health. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are forwarded to expert reviewers for review. This process usually takes up to 8 weeks.

Types of peer review

The process of reviewing papers using the double blind method involves a minimum of two reviewers who have been selected by the section editor, if between the reviewers there are conflicting decisions, then an additional reviewer will decide whether the article is accepted or rejected.

Review report

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

- Original by clearly stating the aims and gaps.

- Methodologically sound

- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines

- Has results/findings that are clearly presented and support the conclusions

- Correctly refers to relevant previous work

- Reviewers are not expected to proofread or copyedit the manuscript. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.

Decisions

Reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Editors will make decisions based on these reports and, if necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board. The Editor's decision is final.