Three things that are true here and nowhere else
Several submission types, one editorial office
Originals, reviews, case reports and editorials each want their own form, their own reviewers and their own route to a decision. That is five or six processes sharing one office.
Reviewer goodwill is the scarce input
Invitation acceptance falls a little every year, and the people who say yes tend to be the same names each time.
Integrity checking became routine
Similarity, image manipulation and paper mill signals moved from occasional to expected, on every submission rather than on suspicion.
A three article type journal, with desk rejection and a revision round
Desk rejection happens before review rather than after it, so a manuscript that will not go forward stops costing reviewer time on day two. Revisions loop back into the same round with the same reviewers, and the record keeps both versions side by side.
The four capabilities this sector leans on
Submission management
Article type decides the form, the required fields and the checks that run.
Submission management →
Peer review workflows
Single, double blind or open, set per article type rather than per journal.
Peer review workflows →
Editorial and decision tools
Reviewer finding across your own database, Publons and Prophy.
Editorial and decision tools →
Reporting and analytics
Time to first decision and reviewer load, per title and per editor.
Reporting and analytics →
Connections that matter in this sector
Journals carry the heaviest integration load of any sector here, because the identifiers and checks are industry infrastructure rather than optional extras.
What buyers in this sector often ask
Can we run several journals from one installation?
Yes. Each title keeps its own workflow, editorial board, forms and branding, and portfolio reporting runs across all of them.
Can a rejected manuscript be transferred to another title?
Yes, with the reviews attached if your policy allows it, and with the author asked to confirm first.
Do you deposit to Crossref on acceptance?
Yes. The metadata validated at submission is what gets deposited, so the deposit does not become a separate re keying job.
How do you handle preprints?
Preprint status is a field on the submission form, and your policy decides whether it affects routing. Nothing is assumed on your behalf.
Can we migrate part way through a volume?
Yes, and the honest approach is not a wholesale data transfer. Manuscripts already out for review are best finished in the old system. Anything left resubmits as new with the response document attached and a flag marking it. Your reviewer records should be exported before that contract ends, because nobody can recover them afterwards.
Tell us what you review.
We will show you the workflow.
Send us your article types and decision routes. We will build them in a session with you.