Contact

This page is a routing guide, not a help desk. It sets out where to send a correction, a question about coverage, a permissions request, or a report that something on the site is broken—and what to put in the message so it can be acted on. It serves readers, researchers, anyone who has been asked to review, and anyone who wants to reuse published material.

STEM Review is reached at info@unipub.org. That is the only address, and it receives every category described below. It sits on a domain the publication does not control; bear that in mind before sending anything sensitive. The address is written out here in plain text so it can be copied by hand, and linked as info@unipub.org for browsers with a mail application configured. There is no contact form on this site and no other channel.

One mailbox serves every kind of message, so the subject line does the sorting. Begin yours with one of these labels, in square brackets: [Correction], [Editorial], [Pitch], [Review], [Permissions], [Press], [Technical], [Privacy], [Legal]. Follow it with a short description. Brackets are used because they survive a chain of replies intact and can be filtered mechanically. Every label has a link further down this page that fills it in for you.

Three things make any message actionable, whatever the label: the URL of the article or page you are writing about, a plain statement of what you are asking for, and a way to reach you. Quote the sentence you mean rather than describing it. A message that refers to an article without naming it costs a round trip, and a round trip is the expensive part here.

Corrections come first. A reader who notices an error is one of the more reliable checks the publication has, and reports are treated that way. If you have found one, say so plainly. You do not need to soften it, and you do not need to be certain—an accurate report of a doubt is useful.

A correction request needs four things: the article URL, the exact sentence or figure at issue, what the correct information is, and a source that can be checked. With those, the claim can be settled; without them it becomes a conversation. Where a correction is accepted, the article is amended. Marking that change on the article itself—what changed, and when—is the standard the publication holds itself to, and the editorial policies state it in the same terms.

Report a correction

Not every objection is a factual error. If your concern is with how a piece was framed, what it omitted, how a claim was sourced, or the integrity of the work, write under [Editorial] rather than [Correction]. Identify the passage, state what you believe is wrong with it, and say what you consider the accurate account to be. Complaints reach the publication, which decides what STEM Review publishes. There is no appeals body beyond that and no external review scheme to escalate to.

If you, your institution, or your company is named in an article, a substantive response on the record is worth sending: where it establishes a factual error it is treated as a correction, and otherwise it is taken on its merits. There is no mechanism for publishing a reply alongside a piece, so this page does not offer one. A request to remove accurate reporting is not something this address can grant. Questions about what the publication covers, or why a subject has or has not been written about, use the same label.

Raise an editorial concern

STEM Review reports on research published elsewhere. There is no submission portal and no manuscript system, unsolicited submissions are not accepted, and nothing can be sent here for publication. What is useful instead is a pointer: the paper or preprint with a DOI, the dataset behind it, an embargo date if one applies, and a sentence on why the finding matters economically as well as technically. Send it under [Pitch].

Coverage cannot be promised in advance, and no reply amounts to a commitment to publish.

Send a tip

If the publication has commissioned a review from you, correspondence about it uses [Review]. Quote the invitation in your message—there is no assignment system behind this address, so the invitation itself is the only context available.

The reviewer guidelines set out the standards that would govern such an assessment: impartiality, confidentiality, anonymity, and the use of AI tools. This page is not a route for offering to review, and the publication is not recruiting through it.

Reviewer correspondence

What may be quoted without asking, and what needs permission, is set out in the terms of service. This page is only the route for asking. Write under [Permissions] with the article URL, where the material would appear, and in what form.

Enquiries about the publication itself rather than about a story go under [Press]. There is no press office and no spokesperson to be put through to. That label also covers questions about how the operation works and how articles are produced; questions about the coverage of a particular subject belong under [Editorial].

Request permission · Press enquiries

Broken pages, images that fail to load, a malformed item in the feed, or a search result that leads nowhere go under [Technical]. Include the URL, what you expected, what happened instead, and the browser or feed reader you were using. Request logs are kept for a short, provider-set window, so a problem reported soon after it happens is the easiest kind to confirm.

The newsletter signup on the site is not connected to a mailing service. Submitting an address returns an error saying so, and there is no list to join or leave; if that changes, the privacy policy is where it will be described. That policy is the substantive account of what the site records, and this page is only the route to a question it does not answer. Requests about your own data go under [Privacy]. Copyright complaints and other formal legal notices go under [Legal].

Report a site problem · Data request · Legal notice

Messages are read as capacity allows, and corrections are looked at before anything else. There is no staffed desk and no measured response time, so none is published here—a number invented for a contact page is worse than no number. Not every message receives an individual reply. A request under [Privacy] is the exception: data protection law sets its own period for answering one, and the privacy policy states it. Where a correction is accepted the article is amended whether or not you hear back, so a quiet inbox is not the same as an ignored report.

Some requests this address cannot resolve. It cannot remove accurate published material, guarantee that a subject will be covered, or arrange advertising, sponsorship, or promotional placement. There is no subscription, account, or login to get help with, and no comments to moderate.

Several questions answer themselves. About covers the mission and the coverage domains, with the editorial standards set out there. Search covers the archive, and the discipline pages list each field: Space, Physics, Computing, Robotics, Biology, Environment.