Publication Support
Journal selection, manuscript writing, submission and reviewer response.
Read more
Seven steps from consultation to acceptance, with nothing hidden in between.
Most of the anxiety around publishing comes from not knowing what happens next. The process is not mysterious; it is seven steps, each with a defined output and a realistic timeframe.
This page exists because the question we are asked most often is not 'can you help' but 'what actually happens'. Authors publishing for the first time frequently do not know what a cover letter is for, what 'major revision' means in practice, whether they may submit to two journals at once, or how long silence from an editor is normal.
The seven steps on the poster are consultation, planning, research and analysis, writing and editing, submission, review and revision, and acceptance and publication. Each one has a deliverable attached, so at any point you can see what has been produced and what is outstanding.
Knowing the sequence also protects you. Authors who understand the process are far less likely to be taken in by an offer to skip it — guaranteed acceptance, publication within a week, or a journal that solicited the paper by email. Those offers exist because the honest process takes time, and time is what people are willing to pay to avoid.
The seven stages from the poster, with the output each one produces.
Editors use a small vocabulary and it is worth knowing it. Desk reject means the editor decided without review, usually on scope or presentation. Reject means reviewers saw it and found problems that are not fixable in this venue. Major revision means the study stands but substantial work is required, and it is a genuinely good outcome. Minor revision is close to acceptance.
The trap is treating major revision as a rejection and walking away. Many accepted papers went through two rounds of major revision. What matters is the response: every comment addressed, including the ones you disagree with, with a courteous explanation where you are declining to make a change and a clear pointer to the page and line where each change was made.
Reviewers are unpaid, often working outside their exact specialism, and occasionally wrong. That is not a reason to be dismissive in the response letter. It is a reason to be exact — quote the reviewer, state what you did, show where. Editors read the response letter more carefully than the revised manuscript.
You send the study. We read it and tell you what it can realistically reach. No charge, and sometimes the answer is that it needs more work first.
Target journal chosen with you, timeline set backwards from your deadline, scope and responsibilities written down.
Any gaps in the analysis closed, results re-run to the reporting standard the target journal requires.
Manuscript built to the journal's structure, language edited, figures and references formatted to specification.
Cover letter, metadata, suggested reviewers where allowed, and the upload itself, with the confirmation sent to you.
The decision explained, a point-by-point response written, the revision resubmitted, and proofs checked before publication.
Six weeks of silence after submission is normal. Three months is common. Under review for four months without an update is worth one polite enquiry to the editorial office, not five. Journals vary enormously, and the guide for authors usually states an average time to first decision — we check that before shortlisting, precisely because waiting is the hardest part.
Simultaneous submission to more than one journal is not permitted and is treated as serious misconduct. You may submit to another journal only after withdrawal or rejection. If a paper has been sitting for an unreasonable time, the correct route is to withdraw formally and then submit elsewhere, and we will help you write that letter.
Once accepted there is still work: proofs arrive with a short deadline and must be checked carefully, because errors introduced at typesetting become permanent. We check them with you, against the accepted manuscript, and return the corrections on time.
| What you receive |
|---|
| Written assessment of the study's publication prospects |
| Journal shortlist with timelines and fees |
| A dated plan for each step |
| Manuscript in the journal's format |
| Cover letter and submission confirmation |
| Decision letter explained in plain language |
| Point-by-point response and revised manuscript |
| Checked proofs and final publication record |
No. Simultaneous submission is treated as misconduct across essentially all reputable journals and can result in a ban. Submit to one, and only approach another after formal withdrawal or a rejection.
Check the journal's stated average time to first decision. If you are past it by a clear margin — say a month — one polite, brief enquiry to the editorial office is appropriate. Repeated chasing does not speed anything up.
It tells the editor in a paragraph why this paper belongs in this journal, what is new about it, and confirms that it is original and not under review elsewhere. Editors use it to decide whether to send the paper out at all, so it is worth writing properly.
We can assist with the portal, the metadata and the files, but the submission is made in your name as the author and requires your account and your confirmation of the declarations. We never impersonate an author in a submission system.
Journal selection, manuscript writing, submission and reviewer response.
Read more
Bibliometric mapping that turns a literature pile into a defensible research gap.
Read more
End-to-end support for PhD and M.Tech thesis writing, analysis and publication.
Read moreSend your topic, your dataset or one draft chapter. We will tell you honestly what it needs — before you pay anything. The first consultation is free.