外文审稿过程

IntroductionThe peer review process is an essential component of scholarly communication, serving as the gatekeeper for maintaining the integrity, credibility, and quality of research published in academic journals. This comprehensive analysis delves into the multifaceted nature of the English peer review process, exploring its various stages, the roles of stakeholders involved, the standards applied, and the challenges faced, with a particular focus on ensuring high-quality output and stringent evaluation criteria.1. **Stages of the English Peer Review Process**The peer review process typically unfolds in three main stages: submission, review, and decision-making.**Submission:** Researchers submit their manuscripts to a journal, adhering to the specific guidelines provided by the publication. The manuscript must be well-structured, clearly written, and formatted according to the journal's requirements. This stage sets the foundation for the subsequent evaluation, as the clarity and organization of the paper facilitate a smoother and more efficient review.**Review:** Once a manuscript is received, it undergoes a preliminary assessment by the editor-in-chief or an associate editor to determine its suitability for the journal in terms of scope, novelty, and adherence to ethical standards. If deemed appropriate, the manuscript is then assigned to expert reviewers who are invited to provide a detailed, critical evaluation. These reviewers, typically anonymous to the authors, assess the paper based on predefined criteria, such as originality, methodology, data analysis, interpretation, and contribution to the field. They may also provide suggestions for improvement and identify potential areas of concern.**Decision-Making:** Upon receiving the reviewers' feedback, the editor consolidates the comments and makes a decision – typically, accept, revise and resubmit, or reject. The editor weighs the reviewers' opinions, considering their expertise, the consistency of their evaluations, and the overall meritof the study. In cases where reviewer opinions diverge significantly, the editor might seek additional reviews or consult with members of the editorial board to reach a fair and informed decision.2. **Roles of Stakeholders**Several key players contribute to the success and rigor of the English peer review process:**Authors:** Researchers are responsible for preparing manuscripts that adhere to the highest scientific and ethical standards. They must present their findings clearly, accurately, and comprehensively, providing sufficient detail for others to replicate their work if necessary. Authors should also respond constructively to reviewer feedback during the revision stage, addressing concerns raised and improving the manuscript accordingly.**Reviewers:** As the cornerstone of the peer review system, reviewers are experts in their respective fields who volunteer their time and expertise to evaluate manuscripts. They are expected to maintain confidentiality, impartiality, and professionalism, providing objective, constructive criticism that helps authors enhance the quality of their work and editors make informed decisions. Reviewers should also alert editors to any potential conflicts of interest, plagiarism, or other ethical violations.**Editors:** Editors oversee the entire peer review process, ensuring its fairness, timeliness, and adherence to the journal's standards. They are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers, managing the review timeline, mediating disputes, and making final decisions on manuscript acceptance. Editors must balance the need for rigorous evaluation with the desire to foster innovation and progress in their discipline, all while maintaining the journal's reputation and impact.**Publishers and Journal Management Teams:** These entities provide the infrastructure and support necessary for the peer review process to function effectively. They establish policies, guidelines, and workflows, manage the online submission and review platforms, and ensure compliance with ethical andlegal requirements. Publishers and journal teams also play a crucial role in promoting transparency, diversity, and inclusivity within the peer review process.3. **Standards Applied in the Peer Review Process**Several core principles guide the evaluation of manuscripts during peer review:**Scientific Rigor:** Manuscripts are assessed for their methodological soundness, including the appropriateness of the research design, sample selection, data collection and analysis methods, and statistical techniques used. The reviewers ensure that the study's results are valid, reliable, and generalizable.**Originality and Significance:** The novelty and importance of the research question, the contribution to the existing knowledge base, and the potential impact on the field are crucial factors in determining a manuscript's suitability for publication. Reviewers evaluate whether the study offers fresh insights, challenges prevailing theories, or addresses critical gaps in the literature.**Clarity and Organization:** A well-written manuscript should communicate ideas and findings effectively, with a logical flow, clear language, and concise presentation. Reviewers assess the manuscript's structure, coherence, and readability, ensuring that it meets the journal's standards and can be easily understood by the intended audience.**Ethical Conduct:** Adherence to ethical principles, such as obtaining informed consent, protecting participant privacy, and disclosing potential conflicts of interest, is paramount in the peer review process. Reviewers and editors scrutinize manuscripts for any signs of misconduct, such as plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification of data.4. **Challenges and Innovations in Peer Review**Despite its vital role in scholarly publishing, the peer review process faces several challenges:**Timeliness:** The time-consuming nature of peer review can lead to lengthypublication delays, potentially hindering the dissemination of new knowledge. To address this issue, journals are exploring innovative approaches, such as cascading peer review, where rejected manuscripts from high-impact journals are transferred, along with reviewer comments, to lower-tier publications. Additionally, preprint servers allow researchers to share their work immediately, bypassing traditional peer review timelines.**Quality Control and Bias:** The peer review system is not immune to human biases, such as gender, institutional prestige, or personal relationships. To mitigate these issues, journals are implementing double-blind or open peer review models, where the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed or disclosed, respectively. Moreover, training programs for reviewers and editors can help raise awareness of unconscious biases and promote fair, objective evaluations.**Resource Constraints:** The increasing volume of submissions and the reliance on voluntary, unpaid reviewers can strain the peer review system. Solutions include incentivizing reviewers through recognition programs, offering continuing education credits, or experimenting with paid peer review models. Additionally, artificial intelligence (AI) tools can assist with tasks such as identifying suitable reviewers, detecting plagiarism, and assessing manuscript quality, thereby streamlining the process.ConclusionThe English peer review process is a complex, multifaceted endeavor that plays a pivotal role in ensuring the high quality and stringent standards of scholarly publications. By examining its stages, stakeholders, applied standards, and challenges, this analysis underscores the importance of continuous improvement and innovation in the face of evolving research landscapes. By embracing new technologies, addressing biases, and fostering collaboration among all participants, the peer review process can continue to serve as the bedrock of academic integrity and knowledge advancement.(Word count: 1506 words)。

international journal of biological sciences审稿流程一般来说，期刊的审稿流程如下：
1. 初审：主编会大致浏览文章的内容、结构、格式等，如果符合或基本符合本期刊的要求，可以进入下一阶段。

2. 外审：编辑部将文章送给同行一到三个专家进行评议，专家在规定时间内将论文评论完成，并将其返回编辑部进行复审。

3. 复审：编辑部会结合外审专家的意见开始第一次正式处理一篇文章，处理的结果可能是大修、小修、直接退稿。

4. 主编终审：复审完成的论文会进入审核的最后阶段，终审会决定论文命运的关键，如若复审提出的问题到了终审阶段仍未解决，可能会再给一次修改机会，也可能会直接退稿。

5. 录用：收到录用通知后，在收到版面费通知后及时缴纳，后续论文会进入到正常的校对环节。

6. 知网首发：将已经确定录用的论文先发表到网站上，方便同行读者引用、下载。

7. 最终刊发：待到纸版期刊刊发时再同步到网络上。

外语学刊的审稿流程详解及注意事项The process of manuscript review in foreign language journals typically involves the following steps:1. Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts to the journal's editorial office. This can be done through an online submission system or via email.2. Initial assessment: The editor-in-chief or the editorial board members review the manuscript to determine its suitability for the journal. They assess the quality, relevance, and originality of the research.3. Peer review: If the manuscript passes the initial assessment, it is sent to external reviewers who are experts in the field. The reviewers evaluate the manuscript's methodology, results, and interpretation. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations to the editor.4. Decision: Based on the reviewers' feedback, theeditor-in-chief or the editorial board makes a decision on whetherto accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript. This decision is communicated to the authors along with the reviewers' comments.5. Revision: If revisions are requested, the authors make the necessary changes to address the reviewers' comments and suggestions. They may also provide a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments.6. Final decision: After the authors submit the revised manuscript, the editor-in-chief or the editorial board reviews it to ensure that the revisions have been adequately addressed. They make the final decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript.7. Publication: If the manuscript is accepted, it goes through the production process, including copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading. Finally, it is published in the journal.中文回答：外语学刊的审稿流程通常包括以下步骤：1. 提交：作者将稿件提交给学刊的编辑部。

journal of experimental medicine审稿流程全文共四篇示例，供读者参考第一篇示例：《Journal of Experimental Medicine》是一家备受瞩目的专业期刊，它在医学科研领域享有很高的声誉。

无数研究人员梦寐以求能够在这本期刊上发表自己的研究成果，因为这将为他们赢得学术认可和职业发展提供强力支持。

能否成功发表论文取决于很多因素，其中审稿流程是至关重要的一环。

本文将介绍《Journal of Experimental Medicine》的审稿流程，帮助读者更好地了解这个过程。

作者提交稿件后，编辑部会对稿件进行初步审查。

初步审查的目的是检查稿件格式是否符合期刊的要求，以及判断稿件的主题是否与期刊的定位相符。

如果作者在初步审查中未能通过，那么稿件将被退回，并且作者需要重新修改后重新提交。

如果稿件通过初步审查，那么接下来就是进入审稿环节。

在审稿环节中，编辑部会选择两名或以上的专家学者作为审稿人，他们将对稿件进行详细的评审。

审稿人将对稿件的创新性、学术价值、方法的可靠性等方面进行评价，并提出修改意见。

一般情况下，审稿人会在一定的时间内完成评审工作，并将评审意见反馈给编辑部。

编辑部会根据审稿意见和自身判断，决定是否接受稿件。

如果稿件被拒绝，编辑部通常会给予作者拒绝的理由和修改建议。

作者可以根据意见进行修改后再次提交。

如果稿件被接受，编辑部将通知作者，并开始后续的编辑和排版工作。

在编辑和排版环节中，编辑部会对稿件进行更为细致的修订和润色，以确保其表达清晰、语言通顺。

编辑部会进行排版和设计工作，使稿件整体呈现出专业的风格。

编辑部将稿件发表在《Journal of Experimental Medicine》上，并通知作者。

需要注意的是，在整个审稿流程中，作者需要严格遵守期刊的投稿规定，确保实验数据的真实性和可靠性，避免不当引用和抄袭等学术不端行为。

作者还需要对审稿人的意见认真对待，并尽快做出修改和回复。

审稿流程英文摘编辑In the academic world, the peer-review process and the editing of English abstracts play a pivotal role inensuring the quality and impact of research papers. This article delves into the intricacies of the English peer-review process, focusing on its key stages and offering insights into how to effectively edit English abstracts for maximum clarity and impact.**The Peer-Review Process**The peer-review process is the cornerstone of academic publishing, ensuring that research papers meet high standards of quality and relevance. It typically involves several stages, each crucial to the overall quality of the paper.1. **Submission**: Authors submit their manuscripts toa journal, which undergoes an initial screening for compliance with the journal's scope and format requirements.2. **Desk Rejection**: Papers that do not meet thejournal's criteria are rejected at this stage, usually without external review. 3. **External Review**: Papersthat pass the initial screening are sent to external experts in the field for detailed review. These experts, known as reviewers, assess the paper's originality, methodology, analysis, and conclusions. 4. **Reviewer Reports**: Reviewers submit detailed reports to the journal editors, highlighting the paper's strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement. 5. **Editorial Decision**: Based on the reviewer reports, the editor makes a decision on the paper's acceptance, rejection, or revision. 6.**Revision and Resubmission**: Authors may be asked to revise their papers based on reviewer feedback. Once revisions are complete, the paper is resubmitted forfurther review. 7. **Final Acceptance and Publication**: Once the paper is accepted, it undergoes final editing and formatting before being published online or in print.**The Art of Editing English Abstracts**The abstract is a crucial component of any research paper, serving as a concise summary of the paper's key ideas and findings. Editing an English abstract involves more than just checking grammar and syntax; it requires anuanced understanding of how to effectively communicate complex research findings in a clear and impactful manner.1. **Clarity and Conciseness**: Abstracts should be clear, concise, and focused, highlighting the paper's main objectives, methods, findings, and conclusions. Avoidjargon and technical language that may confuse readers. 2.**Structure**: A well-structured abstract helps readers quickly understand the paper's content. Typically,abstracts follow a structure that includes an introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. 3.**Keywords**: Ensure that your abstract includes relevant keywords that will help researchers find your paper when searching for related research. 4. **Third-PersonNarrative**: Abstracts are typically written in the third person, using impersonal language to maintain objectivity and neutrality. 5. **Consistency with Paper Content**: The abstract should accurately reflect the content of the paper, avoiding any misrepresentations or omissions.In conclusion, the peer-review process and the editingof English abstracts are integral to the success of academic research. Understanding the intricacies of thepeer-review process and mastering the art of editing English abstracts can significantly enhance a paper's impact and visibility, ensuring that research findings are effectively communicated to a wide audience.**中文审稿流程与英文摘要编辑的艺术**在学术界，审稿流程和英文摘要编辑在确保研究论文质量和影响力方面发挥着至关重要的作用。

国外期刊投稿、审稿过程以及常用术语学习了一些杂志的在线投稿系统中的作者，审稿人，编辑部和总编的分工和作业情况，在这里和新手以某一个典型例子进行探讨学习一下。

1. Author 作者如何在线投稿？在线投稿大致步骤：Step 1: Log In 登陆The login page gives you three options:1. Log in with your known User ID and Password 用户名和密码2. Check to see if you have an existing account 确认是否已经注册过3. Create a new account 没有就注册一个Step 2: Enter your Author Center 进入作者中心To begin a new submission, check a previous submission, continue a submission begun earlier, or submit a revised manuscript, choose Author Center. 确认是新投，还是投修改稿Step 3: Inside Your Author Center 在个人的作者中心里面Existing manuscripts are found in one of three areas: 包括三个区域（这个每个杂志可能有区别的）Manuscripts to be Revised 需修改稿Partially Submitted Manuscripts 部分上传稿Submitted Manuscripts 已上传稿To start a NEW manuscript submissio n, choose “Submit First Draft of New Manuscript” link. 开始上传新稿Step 4: Entering Data 输入资料The following screens ask you to enter each piece of data associated with your manuscript. Most of this data will also be included in the text of your manuscript, but needs to be entered in this format in order to make the system searchable by these fields. It is used for screen display and e-mail notifications only. You cannot enter text into the Manuscript Data Summary table – scroll down each screen to enter the required information. 按照提示一步一步输入Press “Save and Continue” at the bottom of each screen in order to save all of your work. If you press the "Back" or "Forward" button on your browser your work will not be saved. 继续时选择保存和继续，如果点击back或者forward，原来输入的内容会消失。

英文文章审稿流程The process of peer review for an English article involves several steps to ensure the quality and validity of the research. Here is a detailed description of the peer review process:1. Submission: The author submits the article to a journal for consideration. The editor reviews the submission to determine if it meets the journal's scope and guidelines.2. Assignment: The editor assigns the article to one or more reviewers who have expertise in the subject matter. Reviewers are usually researchers or scholars in the same field.3. Review: Reviewers read the article carefully to evaluate its quality, originality, methodology, and significance. They provide feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of the research.4. Decision: Based on the reviewers' comments, theeditor makes a decision on whether to accept the article,request revisions, or reject it. The author is informed of the decision along with the reviewers' comments.5. Revision: If revisions are requested, the author revises the article according to the reviewers' feedbackand resubmits it for further review.6. Final decision: The editor makes a final decision on the revised article, taking into account the reviewers' comments and the author's revisions. The article is either accepted for publication or rejected.7. Publication: If the article is accepted, it is published in the journal and made available to thescientific community for reading and citation.中文翻译：英文文章的审稿流程涉及多个步骤，以确保研究的质量和有效性。

国外期刊投稿、审稿过程以及常用术语学习了一些杂志的在线投稿系统中的作者，审稿人，编辑部和总编的分工和作业情况，在这里和新手以某一个典型例子进行探讨学习一下。

1. Author 作者如何在线投稿？在线投稿大致步骤：Step 1: Log In 登陆The login page gives you three options:1. Log in with your known User ID and Password 用户名和密码2. Check to see if you have an existing account 确认是否已经注册过3. Create a new account 没有就注册一个Step 2: Enter your Author Center 进入作者中心To begin a new submission, check a previous submission, continue a submission begun earlier, or submit a revised manuscript, choose Author Center. 确认是新投，还是投修改稿Step 3: Inside Your Author Center 在个人的作者中心里面Existing manuscripts are found in one of three areas: 包括三个区域（这个每个杂志可能有区别的）Manuscripts to be Revised 需修改稿Partially Submitted Manuscripts 部分上传稿Submitted Manuscripts 已上传稿To start a NEW manuscript submission, choose “Submit First Draft of New Manuscript” link. 开始上传新稿Step 4: Entering Data 输入资料The following screens ask you to enter each piece of data associated with your manuscript. Most of this data will also be included in the text of your manuscript, but needs to be entered in this format in order to make the system searchable by these fields. It is used for screen display and e-mail notifications only. You cannot enter text into the Manuscript Data Summary table – scroll down each screen to enter the required information. 按照提示一步一步输入Press “Save and Continue” at the bottom of each screen in order to save all of your work. If you press the "Back" or "Forward" button on your browser your work will not be saved. 继续时选择保存和继续，如果点击back或者forward，原来输入的内容会消失。

英文杂志审稿流程under review全文共3篇示例，供读者参考篇1Title: The Review Process of English Magazine: Under ReviewIntroductionPublishing in English magazines is a highly competitive process that involves rigorous peer review to ensure the quality and integrity of published research. In this article, we will delve into the review process of English magazines, specifically focusing on the stage when a manuscript is "under review".Stage 1: SubmissionThe first step in the review process begins with the submission of a manuscript to the English magazine. Authors are required to adhere to the submission guidelines provided by the magazine, which outline the formatting requirements, word count limits, and citation style. Once the manuscript is submitted, it undergoes an initial screening process to ensure it meets the scope and quality standards of the magazine.Stage 2: Assignment to ReviewersAfter passing the initial screening, the manuscript is assigned to expert reviewers who possess knowledge and expertise in the field of study. Reviewers are selected based on their qualifications and experience to provide valuable feedback on the manuscript's originality, methodology, results, and conclusions. The reviewers are given a specific timeframe to evaluate the manuscript and provide detailed feedback to the editors.Stage 3: Review and EvaluationDuring the review process, reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript to assess its significance, validity, and contribution to the existing literature. They may identify areas for improvement, suggest revisions, and provide constructive feedback to help the authors strengthen their arguments and findings. Reviewers also consider ethical considerations, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, and conflicts of interest, to uphold the integrity of the research.Stage 4: Decision MakingOnce the reviewers have submitted their feedback, the editors of the English magazine review the comments to make an informed decision on the manuscript. Depending on the reviews, editors may choose to accept the manuscript as is,request revisions from the authors, or reject the manuscript if it does not meet the magazine's standards. Authors are typically notified of the decision along with the reviewers' comments to guide them in revising their manuscript.ConclusionThe review process of English magazines is a thorough and transparent process that aims to ensure the quality and integrity of published research. By understanding the stages involved in the review process, authors can navigate the submission and review process with confidence and increase their chances of publication in prestigious English magazines. The stage when a manuscript is "under review" plays a crucial role in shaping the final outcome of the manuscript and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the academic community.篇2Title: Understanding the Under Review Process of English Magazine Manuscript SubmissionIntroductionSubmitting a manuscript to an English magazine for publication is a significant milestone for any researcher or author. However, after submission, the manuscript goes through arigorous review process to ensure quality and relevance before it is accepted for publication. One of the stages in this process is the "under review" stage, where the manuscript is evaluated by expert reviewers. In this article, we will discuss the under review process of English magazine manuscript submission, including its importance, the criteria used for evaluation, and what authors can expect during this stage.Importance of Under Review ProcessThe under review process plays a crucial role in maintaining the quality and credibility of English magazines. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on various criteria, such as originality, relevance, methodology, and significance of the research findings. Their feedback helps editors make informed decisions on whether to accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript. This process ensures that only high-quality and well-researched articles are published, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in various fields.Criteria for EvaluationDuring the under review stage, reviewers assess the manuscript based on several criteria to determine its suitability for publication. Some of the key criteria include:1. Originality: Reviewers evaluate the uniqueness and novelty of the research presented in the manuscript. They assess whether the research adds new insights to the existing literature and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.2. Relevance: Reviewers consider the relevance of the research topic to the magazine's audience and the broader academic community. They assess whether the research addresses current issues or gaps in the literature and has practical implications.3. Methodology: Reviewers evaluate the research methodology used in the manuscript, including the study design, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques. They assess the rigor and validity of the research process and the reliability of the findings.4. Significance: Reviewers assess the significance of the research findings and their implications for theory, practice, or policy. They consider whether the findings have the potential to make a substantial contribution to the field and advance knowledge in the area of study.What to Expect During Under Review StageDuring the under review stage, authors can expect the following:1. Waiting Period: The under review stage can vary in duration, depending on the magazine's editorial process and the availability of reviewers. Authors should be prepared to wait patiently for feedback from the reviewers.2. Feedback: Reviewers provide detailed feedback on the manuscript, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. Authors should carefully consider the feedback and address any concerns raised by the reviewers in their revisions.3. Revisions: In some cases, reviewers may request revisions to the manuscript before it can be accepted for publication. Authors should carefully revise the manuscript based on the feedback provided and submit a revised version for further review.ConclusionThe under review process is an essential stage in the manuscript submission process for English magazines. It ensures that only high-quality and well-researched articles are published, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in various fields. Authors should be prepared for the waiting period, carefullyconsider reviewer feedback, and make revisions as necessary to increase the chances of their manuscript being accepted for publication.篇3Title: Peer Review Process for English Magazines - Under ReviewIntroductionThe peer review process is a critical component of the publication of academic articles in English magazines. It ensures that articles meet high standards of quality and credibility before being accepted for publication. In this document, we will explore the peer review process for English magazines, focusing on the stage of under review.SubmissionThe first step in the peer review process is the submission of an article to an English magazine. Authors typically submit their articles through an online submission system or email. Upon submission, the editorial team assesses the article to ensure it meets the magazine's publishing criteria.Editorial EvaluationAfter the submission, the editorial team evaluates the article to determine its suitability for peer review. This evaluation includes checking for adherence to the magazine's submission guidelines, originality, and relevance to the magazine's scope. If the article passes the initial evaluation, it is sent for peer review.Peer ReviewThe peer review process involves sending the article to experts in the field for evaluation. These peer reviewers assess the article's quality, significance, methodology, and conclusions. They provide feedback to the editorial team on whether the article should be accepted, revised, or rejected. The review process can take several weeks to months, depending on the availability of reviewers.Under ReviewDuring the under review stage, the article is being evaluated by peer reviewers. The editorial team coordinates communication between the authors and the reviewers, ensuring that the review process runs smoothly. Authors may receive feedback from reviewers, which they must address through revisions to their article.RevisionsIf the peer reviewers recommend revisions to the article, the authors are required to make these revisions. Authors must carefully address each comment and suggestion made by the reviewers to improve the quality of their article. Once the revisions are completed, the article is resubmitted for another round of review.DecisionAfter the revisions are made, the article undergoes a final evaluation by the editorial team. Based on the feedback from the peer reviewers and the quality of the revisions, a decision is made on whether to accept or reject the article. The decision may also involve further revisions requested by the reviewers.ConclusionThe peer review process for English magazines plays a crucial role in ensuring the quality and credibility of published articles. The under review stage is an important part of this process, where articles are evaluated by experts in the field. By following a rigorous peer review process, English magazines maintain high standards of academic publishing.。

studies in higher education审稿流程
Studies in Higher Education（SHE）的审稿流程主要包括以下几个步骤：
1.稿件提交：作者将稿件提交到编辑部指定的在线投稿系统中。

2.初步审查：编辑部会对稿件进行初步审查，以确保稿件符合期刊的要求和标准。

3.专家评审：通过初步审查的稿件将被送交专家评审。

专家将对稿件进行深入的评估，
包括内容、研究方法、创新性等方面。

评审周期一般为2-4个月。

4.审稿意见反馈：专家将对稿件提出详细的意见和建议，以帮助作者改进和完善稿件。

编辑部会将专家的反馈意见发送给作者，并邀请作者根据反馈意见对稿件进行修改。

5.修改和完善：作者根据专家的反馈意见对稿件进行修改和完善。

编辑部会再次审查
修改后的稿件，以确保满足期刊的要求和标准。

6.终审和录用：通过最终审查的稿件将被录用并在期刊上发表。

编辑部会将录用通知
发送给作者，并告知稿件的出版时间和页码等信息。

需要注意的是，审稿流程可能会因期刊而异，因此具体流程可能有所差异。

建议作者在投稿前仔细阅读期刊的投稿指南或联系编辑部以了解具体的审稿流程和要求。