Accessibility Statement

Consortium e-Learning Network Pvt. Ltd. is committed to making RevuMate AI usable by everyone, including researchers, reviewers and editorial staff who use assistive technology. Peer review should not be closed to somebody because the software in front of them was not built with them in mind.

We aim to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 at Level AA, the standard referenced by accessibility law in most of the jurisdictions our authors and reviewers write from. This statement covers the RevuMate AI platform at this domain, including the public pages and the reviewer portal.

RevuMate AI is partially conformant with WCAG 2.1 Level AA. Partially conformant means most of the platform meets the standard, but some content does not yet fully conform.

We publish this rather than claiming full conformance because a statement that overstates what a platform does is worse than no statement: it tells a reader who then hits a barrier that we were not paying attention. The known gaps are in section 5.

Accessibility is assessed on a regular schedule by internal staff and external specialists, using three methods together. No one of them is sufficient on its own.

• Automated tooling, run across the platform to catch the mechanical failures — missing alternative text, insufficient colour contrast, unlabelled controls, invalid landmark structure — at a scale manual testing cannot cover.
• Manual testing by trained specialists, using screen readers and keyboard-only navigation to work through the real tasks: signing in, applying to a journal, reading a manuscript, submitting a review, downloading a certificate. Automated tools cannot tell whether a journey makes sense; a person using it can.
• Feedback from people who use assistive technology in their own work. A barrier reported by somebody trying to finish a review is worth more than any audit, and it is the only method here that finds problems we did not think to look for.

Staff training

Everyone who builds or writes for the platform is expected to understand the accessibility guidelines as they apply to their own role — developers to markup and interaction, editorial staff to the content they publish.

Content requirements

Our editorial policies require published content to be accessible. That includes meaningful alternative text on images, captions and transcripts for multimedia, descriptive link text, and documents uploaded to the platform being structured rather than scanned images of text.

Technology

The interface is maintained for responsive layout and full keyboard operability. Work is ongoing: focus order, visible focus indicators, form labelling and screen-reader announcements are reviewed as parts of the platform are rebuilt.

Suppliers

Third-party components and services we build on are assessed against the same standard before adoption, and an inaccessible dependency is a reason not to use it.

We know about the following, and are working on them. If you meet a barrier that is not listed, please tell us — see section 6.

• Uploaded manuscripts and supplementary files. These are supplied by authors, and a scanned PDF or an unstructured document cannot be made accessible by the platform that stores it. Ask us and we will work with the author to obtain an accessible version.
• Certificates and empanelment letters. These are laid out as printed documents with fixed proportions, which does not reflow well at high zoom. The same information is available as text in your portal.
• Charts and dashboards. Reporting visualisations convey information graphically. The underlying figures are available as tables, but not every chart yet has an equivalent text summary.
• Older interface areas. Some screens predate our current standards and have form labels that are not fully associated with their fields. These are being corrected as each area is revised.

We welcome reports of accessibility barriers, and they are one of the main ways this platform improves. Tell us:

• The page or task where you met the barrier, with the web address if you have it.
• What you were trying to do.
• The browser, operating system and assistive technology you were using, if you know.

We aim to acknowledge a report within 5 working days and to tell you what we intend to do about it, and when, within 20 working days. Where a fix will take longer, we will say so and offer another way to get what you need in the meantime.

If you report a barrier and are unhappy with our response, reply to us saying so and the matter will be looked at by somebody who was not involved the first time. Write to info@stmjournals.com marking the message for the attention of the editorial office.

This statement is reviewed whenever the platform changes materially, and at least annually. It was last updated on 24 October 2026. Our Privacy Policy explains what we do with the information in a report, and our Terms & Conditions govern use of the platform generally.