Peer Reviewer Process

The peer review policy aims to ensure thorough, fair, and unbiased evaluation of manuscripts submitted to the journal. Upholding high standards of scientific integrity and ethical conduct, the journal strives to offer authors constructive feedback to enhance the quality and impact of their work.

Editorial assessment: Upon submission, manuscripts undergo initial evaluation by the editorial team, focusing on relevance to the journal's scope, potential interest to readers, and adherence to submission criteria.

Author response: Authors have the opportunity to address reviewers' comments and revise the manuscript accordingly, providing a thorough response to each comment.

Editorial decision: Based on reviewers' feedback, authors' responses, and editor's evaluation, the final decision to accept, reject, or request revisions is made. Authors receive the editor's decision along with any additional guidance.

Peer review process: Manuscripts passing editorial review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers proficient in the subject matter. Reviewers evaluate scientific merit, originality, significance, clarity, and alignment with the journal's scope.

Reviewer selection: Reviewers are chosen based on expertise and experience, ensuring no conflicts of interest with authors or manuscripts.

Reviewer guidelines: Reviewers receive guidance on the review process and criteria for evaluation, emphasizing constructive feedback and recommendations for acceptance, revision, or rejection.

Reviewer feedback: Detailed feedback, including strengths, weaknesses, and improvement suggestions, is provided to authors. Reviewers' comments, along with an editor's summary, are shared with authors.