All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Civil Engineering and Applied Solutions (CEAS) undergo a single-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and relevance of the research. Editorial decisions are based on an initial assessment by the editorial team and detailed evaluations by independent expert reviewers. Review durations may vary depending on the complexity and subject matter of the submission. Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere.
The peer review process follows these key stages:
Registration and Submission
Authors must register on the CEAS website and provide full affiliation details for all contributors. The manuscript must be submitted in the prescribed format, as outlined in the journal’s Guide for Authors.
Preliminary Compliance Check
The editorial coordinator conducts an initial check to confirm that the manuscript adheres to formatting guidelines and includes all required documents. Incomplete submissions may be returned to authors for correction before processing can proceed.
Initial Editorial Evaluation
The Editor-in-Chief reviews the manuscript to assess its alignment with the journal’s scope, originality, and potential contribution to the field. At this stage, manuscripts may be rejected or returned with suggestions for improvement prior to peer review.
Plagiarism Screening
All submissions are screened using iThenticate or Turnitin to check for plagiarism. Manuscripts with a similarity index above 25% may be rejected or returned for revision.
Reviewer Selection and Invitation
Qualified reviewers with relevant expertise are invited to evaluate the manuscript. This process may involve coordination with associate editors. At least 2 reviewers must agree to review the manuscript before it proceeds. In complex or interdisciplinary cases, additional reviewers may be consulted.
Initial Decision Based on Reviews
Following the reviewers’ assessments, the editorial board will decide among the following outcomes:
Accept as is – The manuscript meets all criteria and is ready for publication with minor editorial checks.
Minor Revisions Required – Small improvements are needed before acceptance. Reviewer feedback will be shared with the authors.
Major Revisions Required – Substantial changes are necessary. The manuscript will be returned to the authors with detailed reviewer comments. Additional reviewers may be consulted if needed.
Reject – The manuscript does not meet CEAS standards or is outside the journal’s scope. Review comments will be provided for clarity.
Revision and Resubmission
Authors are expected to revise the manuscript in response to reviewer feedback:
Resubmission – The revised manuscript and any supplementary materials must be resubmitted through the system.
Response Letter – A clear, point-by-point response to each reviewer comment is required. Authors may respectfully disagree with suggestions but must provide a rationale or an alternative solution.
Final Decision
Upon resubmission, the editorial board evaluates the revised manuscript:
Accepted – Revisions are satisfactory, and the manuscript is accepted for publication.
Further Revisions Needed – Additional changes are requested, and the manuscript is returned for another revision round.
Final Rejection – If the manuscript still does not meet journal standards, it will be formally rejected.
CEAS is committed to maintaining a transparent, efficient, and rigorous peer review process to uphold the highest academic standards and support authors in producing impactful civil engineering research.