7.10 - Search criteria, system events, referee form, warnings

13 November 2025

New criteria for advanced searches

Two cool date criteria are now available to create dynamic searches:

New system events

Two system events are now implemented properly:

• "Resubmission after technical check": after a technical check, the resubmission is now distinct from a normal submission! This presents several advantages when the author resubmits:
  • the corresponding author will not get the usual acknowledgement of receipt
  • likewise for co-authors
  • and editors will not receive the same e-mail
• "Peer review complete"
  • this event trigger has been corrected and now works properly: the editor will get notified when the last scheduled referee provides his report.

For these two events, no default template has been provided. We will definitely provide them shortly for "Resubmission after technical check".

System events: modify the Reply-To header!

In e-mail addressing, the Reply-To header is the address that should be used to reply to a message. Typically in Nestor, this mechanism is used in this scenario:

• Albert Einstein requests a revision
• The mail is sent to the author with the following:
  • From: nestor@edpsciences.org
  • Reply-To: albert.einstein@eth.ch
• the author replies to the message: Albert is the recipient (not the system), even though Albert was not the original sender

This mechanism has been extended to specific system events, with the possibility of using Reply-To --> the current editor. Specifically:

• when the author gets an acknowldgement of revision (--> replies to the current editor)
• when the author gets an automatic reminder to revise (same)
• when the referee gets an acknowledgement of invitation (same)
• when the referee gets an acknowledgement of decline (same)
• when the referee gets an acknowledgement of report (same)
• when the referee gets an automatic cancellation (same)
• when the referee gets an automatic reminder (same)

By default, none of these events have been configured to reply to the current editor, we invite you to configure this if relevant to your workflow, this is defined in the template config:

Referee report form

A long awaited ergonomy update to prevent referees from forgetting to complete their report.

User warnings (availability, conflict of interest etc)

Following this update, several improvements have been made to user warnings behaviour:

• the new warning merely links to the article list (screenshot below)
• any editor can check the whole list, even if unassigned
  • this behaviour has also been extended to users' page
• common warnings are not displayed when reinviting referees on a revision