Peer Review Policy

Vivrtih Journal of Food Science and Clinical Nutrition employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure fairness, objectivity, and scholarly integrity.

Manuscripts submitted to Vivrtih Journal must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration elsewhere. Authors must designate a corresponding author to manage all communications with the journal. All submissions are formally acknowledged upon receipt.

Conflict of Interest Safeguards

Submissions from Editorial Board members are reviewed independently by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors and sent to external reviewers. Board members who are authors are excluded from all editorial decisions regarding their own manuscripts.

Each manuscript undergoes initial screening by the editorial team to assess:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope
• Originality and significance
• Ethical compliance and formatting adherence

Manuscripts lacking sufficient novelty, methodological rigor, or clarity may be desk-rejected at this stage.

Step 1: Submission
Manuscripts are submitted via the journal’s online portal or designated email.

Step 2: Initial Screening
The Managing Editor verifies scope alignment, checks for plagiarism, and ensures compliance with submission guidelines.

Step 3: Editorial Assignment
Suitable manuscripts are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor based on subject expertise.

Step 4: Reviewer Selection
The assigned editor selects two or more (when required) qualified reviewers to evaluate the manuscript’s scientific validity, originality, methodology, and clarity.

Step 5: Editorial Decision
Based on reviewer feedback, the editor makes a decision: accept, revise, or reject. The Editor may also refine or clarify reviewers’ comments, where necessary, to correct factual inaccuracies or omissions before they are communicated to authors.

Step 6: Copyediting & Publication
Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting and formatting before online publication.

• Relevance: Alignment with journal scope and thematic focus
• Originality/Contribution: Novel contributions or present well-structured findings.
• Scientific Rigor: Sound methodology, data integrity, and analytical clarity
• Clarity: Logical structure and quality of writing
• Ethical Integrity: Adherence to research and publication ethics
• Responsiveness: Reviewers' comments must be constructive and sufficiently addressed by the authors.

• Acceptance: Requires at least two favourable reviews, minor revisions may be accepted without re-review
• Revision: Major revisions trigger a second round of peer review. Once authors submit the revised manuscript, it will undergo a second round of review before a final decision.
• Rejection: Manuscripts are rejected if both reviewers identify fundamental flaws or ethical violations