Submission & Peer Review

Submission categories

Authors may submit a full paper or an abstract.

• Regular papers should report completed, validated research with a clearly articulated technical or scientific contribution.
• Position papers may present work in progress or a well-supported position on a scientific question, method, procedure, context, or result within the conference scope.
• Abstracts are appropriate for early-stage research or for presenting findings from previously published work. An abstract must not republish the original paper. Supporting publications or videos may be included where the author has permission to share them.

Submissions must be written in clear, professional English and aligned with one or more BIOSTEC tracks. Authors should identify the nature of the contribution and the biomedical problem, application domain, or operational setting it addresses.

Double-blind submission

The initial manuscript must not contain author names, affiliations, biographies, acknowledgements, or other information that could disclose the authors’ identities. All full papers are screened for plagiarism before review.

Only original work may be submitted. Manuscripts must not substantially overlap with work already published or simultaneously submitted to a journal or another proceedings-based conference. Authors should avoid excessive self-citation, and a paper should have no more than 14 authors.

Review process

Regular papers receive at least two reviews and ordinarily three or more. Reviewers assess relevance, originality, technical quality, significance, and clarity. They also consider whether the manuscript provides:

• an adequate abstract and introduction;
• sufficient experimental evidence and comparative evaluation;
• a critical discussion supported by appropriate figures and tables;
• convincing conclusions and future directions;
• current, relevant references;
• correct formatting and professional English.

Position papers follow a comparable process, with criteria adjusted for speculative arguments and work that is not yet fully validated. Abstracts are reviewed by an expert panel that includes conference and programme leadership. Abstract authors should state their research insight, context, data, methods, and results concisely enough to permit a fair technical assessment.

Final decisions are made by the Programme Committee Chairs. Authors may submit a rebuttal during the designated period; all rebuttals will receive a response, but the final decision is not subject to further appeal.

Submission system

All manuscripts must be submitted through PRIMORIS, the INSTICC conference-management platform, using the official templates. A successful submission generates an automated confirmation email.