OnScientia targets publication delays with pre-submission review model

OnScientia says its journal model is designed to cut uncertainty in scholarly publishing by reviewing research plans before a manuscript is written and guaranteeing a first decision within six weeks. The approach is aimed at researchers, especially doctoral candidates, who face long peer-review delays and avoidable rejections.

Why it matters: - Long peer review timelines can stall research careers, especially for authors in publication-based doctoral programs. - OnScientia is positioning its journal process as an alternative to the slow, unpredictable path common in scholarly publishing. - The model is built to reduce avoidable rejections, improve predictability and shorten the time to a first decision.

What happened: - OnScientia – International Journal of Business, Law & Health outlined a publication model that begins before a manuscript exists. - The journal offers a free, nonbinding Topic & Research Pre-Assessment for planned research projects. - The Editorial Board reviews the topic, research approach, methodology and expected results before writing begins. - The journal says the model is designed to give researchers early feedback on whether a project fits the journal’s requirements. - The journal is based in Miami.

The details: - SciRev data cited in the announcement says authors receive a peer-review decision after an average of 13 weeks. - Only 19% of authors get that decision within one month, according to the same data. - Rejected manuscripts take an average of 16 weeks to receive a rejection decision, four weeks longer than manuscripts that are accepted. - A manuscript stays tied to one journal during peer review and cannot be submitted elsewhere until rejection. - Huisman & Smits found in a Scientometrics study that one third of journals take more than two weeks to issue an editorial-screening decision. - The same study found one sixth take more than four weeks. - The study points to inefficient editorial processes as a significant factor. - OnScientia says research can span business, law and health, including interdisciplinary work across those fields. - The journal requires classification under JEL, JEL-K and MeSH to improve discoverability across the three areas. - Editorial staff check those classifications during the desk compliance review. - The desk compliance check also covers fit with the journal’s scholarly profile and the manuscript’s formal presentation. - Formal deficiencies do not trigger rejection. - Authors receive the manuscript back for revision and can resubmit it. - After desk compliance approval, two independent external reviewers evaluate the manuscript in a double-blind review. - Reviewers assess empirical foundations, methodology, validity of findings and scholarly contribution using the Author Guidelines. - All reviewers complete an internal certification program before appointment. - The Editor-in-Chief makes the first decision no later than six weeks after submission. - Possible outcomes are acceptance, minor revision, major revision or rejection. - Authors receive the reasons for the decision.

Between the lines: - The model shifts some quality control earlier in the process, which can reduce wasted time on manuscripts that are not ready for formal review. - By allowing correction of formal issues instead of immediate rejection, OnScientia lowers one common source of delay and frustration for authors. - The six-week deadline is the clearest differentiator, since many journals leave authors waiting far longer for an initial response. - The interdisciplinary structure also stands out in a system where many journals stay narrowly siloed by discipline. - Dr. Mathias Kunze, OnScientia’s Editor-in-Chief, said conventional peer review creates uncertainty for researchers, especially early-career scholars. - Kunze said the journal aims to reduce those uncertainties through pre-manuscript evaluation, interdisciplinary openness, correction of formal deficiencies and a binding six-week first decision.

What's next: - Researchers can use the pre-assessment stage before drafting a manuscript. - Submitted manuscripts that pass compliance review move into double-blind external peer review. - The journal will continue operating under its six-week first-decision timeline for reviewed submissions. - For doctoral candidates, the model could help limit publication-related delays that slow dissertation progress.

The bottom line: - OnScientia is trying to make scholarly publishing more predictable by moving review earlier, fixing formal errors instead of rejecting papers and setting a firm deadline for the first decision.