Submissions Process

Submission Process and Evaluation for Authors

Submission and Editorial Workflow:
All manuscripts submitted to the Axis Community Research Journal (ACRJ) undergo a structured evaluation process designed to ensure fairness, rigor, and alignment with our scholarly mission.

  • Initial Editorial Assessment: Upon submission, the managing editor conducts an initial screening to verify the manuscript's basic compliance with the journal's scope, formatting guidelines, and ethical standards. This check includes a review for originality using plagiarism detection software.

  • Peer Review: Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are assigned to an editor, who initiates a double-blind peer-review process. The manuscript is sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant field(s) for evaluation based on originality, methodological soundness, significance, clarity, and ethical conduct.

  • Desk Rejection: Submissions may be declined without external peer review if they fall outside the journal's aims and scope, exhibit critical methodological flaws, lack community engagement relevance, are improperly formatted, or fail originality checks. Authors are promptly notified of this decision.

Author Responsibilities Prior to Submission:
Authors are required to ensure the following before submitting a manuscript to ACRJ:

  • Publication Permissions: Written permission must be obtained for the reproduction of any copyrighted material (e.g., figures, tables, lengthy quotations, photographs) not owned by the author(s). For studies involving identifiable individuals in photographs, explicit consent for publication must be secured.

  • Authorship Consent: All individuals listed as authors must have made substantial intellectual contributions, approved the final manuscript, and agreed to its submission. The corresponding author is responsible for confirming this collective consent.

  • Ethical Compliance: For any research involving human participants or animals, formal approval from an accredited Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee is mandatory. The manuscript must include a statement detailing this approval and the process of informed consent. For community-engaged research, a description of ethical partnership practices is also required.

Submission Preparation Checklist
As part of the online submission process, authors will be asked to confirm that their manuscript meets the following criteria:

  • Guideline Adherence: The submission follows all stylistic, structural, and bibliographic requirements outlined in the ACRJ Author Instructions.

  • Originality and Exclusivity: The manuscript represents original work and is not under active consideration, accepted for publication, or previously published in any form in another journal or venue.

  • Reference Verification: All in-text citations have been checked against the reference list to ensure accuracy, completeness, and correct formatting in the Vancouver (numbered) style.

  • Figures and Tables: All figures, tables, and images are clearly numbered, cited sequentially in the text, and include descriptive titles and legends. They are embedded in the correct location within the manuscript file.

  • Permissions Documentation: Necessary permissions for all third-party material have been secured and can be provided to the editorial office upon request.

Structuring Your Submission for Success
To facilitate a smooth review process, authors should pay particular attention to the following structural elements:

  • Title and Abstract: Craft a clear, informative title that accurately reflects the content and community context of the study. The abstract must be a succinct, standalone summary that effectively communicates the research problem, methods, key findings, and conclusions, adhering to the word limit and structure specified for your article type.

  • Clarity of Study Design and Argument: The manuscript should present a logically coherent narrative. Clearly articulate the research problem, objectives, and significance in the introduction. The methodology section must provide a transparent, detailed account of the study design and community engagement approach, enabling assessment and replicability. The argument should flow logically from the introduction through the discussion, with conclusions firmly grounded in the presented evidence.