Peer Review Process

Every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes the following editorial workflow during the peer-review process.

The entire editorial workflow is managed through the online review system. Upon submission, the manuscript is checked by the journal’s editorial office for completeness and metadata accuracy. Next, the manuscript is assigned to an Academic Editor based on their expertise in the subject matter.

The Academic Editor conducts an initial assessment and invites qualified reviewers to provide peer-review reports. If the manuscript is deemed unsuitable, the Academic Editor may reject it before seeking reviews. Based on the submitted reports, the Academic Editor provides one of the following recommendations:

  • Reject: The authors receive any available review reports and are informed that their manuscript will not be considered for publication.
  • Consider after Major Changes: The authors are notified to prepare and submit a revised manuscript incorporating the reviewers’ suggestions. This may involve collecting new data or substantially revising the text. The revised manuscript is reevaluated by one or more of the original reviewers before the Academic Editor makes a new recommendation.
  • Consider after Minor Changes: The authors are asked to prepare and submit a final manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, they may seek further advice from one or more reviewers before recommending “Publish Unaltered.”
  • Publish Unaltered: The manuscript undergoes a final check by the editorial office to ensure it adheres to the journal’s guidelines and policies. Upon successful completion, the authors are notified of the manuscript’s acceptance.
Scroll to Top