Three roles, one flock

Technical Committee and review roles

Reviewer suggestions are automated, but every reviewer assignment, decision and certificate release stays under committee control.

Who does what

Roles and permissions

Five roles share the platform, each seeing only what they need.

Super admin

Full access: settings, deadlines, users, submissions, thematic areas, reviewers, decisions, email templates, reports, certificates and proceedings.

Technical Committee admin

Manages submissions, reviewer assignment, review monitoring, score ranking, final decisions, emails, full-paper requests and reports.

Thematic area coordinator

Views assigned-track abstracts, suggests reviewers, monitors reviews, flags conflicts and recommends decisions.

Reviewer

Accesses only assigned abstracts, accepts or declines invitations, scores against the rubric and submits comments.

Step by step

How the review moves

Every abstract travels the same coop — author, reviewer and Technical Committee each see only what they need.

A

Author

  1. Create account, verify email
  2. Draft and submit abstract
  3. Receive abstract ID
  4. Track status on dashboard
  5. Receive decision
  6. Register if accepted
  7. Upload manuscript
  8. Download certificate
R

Reviewer

  1. Receive invitation email
  2. Accept or decline
  3. Score with the 100-mark rubric
  4. Leave author and confidential notes
  5. Submit and get confirmation
  6. Download certificate
C

Committee / admin

  1. Screen new submissions
  2. Assign two reviewers
  3. Monitor review progress
  4. Resolve ranking and conflicts
  5. Approve final decisions
  6. Send decision emails
  7. Track registration and manuscripts
  8. Export reports and proceedings

Scoring

The 100-mark rubric

Reviewers score on eight criteria; a 20-mark gap between reviewers or a split accept/reject recommendation automatically flags the abstract for a third opinion.

Scientific quality — 60 marks

Originality (15), methodological soundness (20), quality and significance of findings (15), clarity of objective (10).

Relevance and clarity — 40 marks

Theme and track relevance (15), practical relevance to the sector (10), One Health and sustainability relevance (10), clarity of writing (5).