Food Science and Hygiene - Editors Guidelines
Guidance for editorial responsibilities and decision making.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors ensure scope alignment, methodological rigor, and fair decision making in food safety research.
Editors assess methodological rigor, regulatory relevance, and hygiene impact.
Include calibration and validation details for analytical instruments.
Describe batch effects and correction methods in multi site studies.
Provide a rationale for selected microbial indicators or biomarkers.
Describe steps taken to minimize cross contamination.
Editorial Impact
Clear communication with authors improves submission outcomes.
Describe sample handling timelines to avoid bias in microbiological results.
Clarify storage temperatures and shelf life conditions for samples.
Discuss limitations related to food matrix complexity or sample size.
Document packaging conditions or transport variables when relevant.
Core Focus Areas
Rigor
Assess statistical validity and transparency in reporting.
Relevance
Confirm alignment with food safety practice.
Communication
Provide clear guidance to authors and reviewers.
Clear reporting of food safety methods improves reproducibility across laboratories.
When using sensory data, report panel training and scoring scales.
Include references to standards or regulatory guidance where applicable.
Clarify whether results generalize across processing environments.
Decision Criteria
- Sound sampling design and contamination controls
- Clarity in reporting hygiene methods and outcomes
- Alignment with food safety standards
- Ethical compliance and data transparency
Document hygiene practices and sanitation protocols so readers can compare results.
Provide uncertainty measures for key food safety outcomes.
Describe quality assurance steps for laboratory and processing environments.
Explain how missing data were handled in analyses.
Decision Workflow
Screen
Confirm scope fit and methodological readiness.
Assign
Select reviewers with hygiene and safety expertise.
Decide
Weigh evidence quality and public health impact.
Communicate
Provide actionable, clear decisions.
Explain how contamination risks were assessed and mitigated during experiments.
Explain how confounders were handled in observational food studies.
Explain how sanitation verification was performed and documented.
Report effect sizes relative to practical thresholds for safety or quality.
Support
Editors may contact [email protected] for policy clarification or complex cases.
Summaries connecting findings to consumer protection strengthen real world impact.
Report software versions and packages to support reproducibility.
Report statistical corrections for multiple testing when necessary.
Include details on control samples and reference materials.
