Peer Review Process

The Editors-in-Chief will evaluate each submitted manuscript based on its compatibility with the journal's focus and scope. If the submitted manuscript meets these requirements, the Editors-in-Chief assign it to a member of the Editorial Team (editors) who conducts a second evaluation based on the scientific merit and validity of the article and its methodology, the relevance of the article, the reader's interest in the topic, and the article's presentation and readability.

If the submitted manuscript is appropriate for peer review, it is reviewed by one to two members of the Reviewer Board of the journal who have no potential conflicts of interest. If editors are unable to locate a specific reviewer for a submitted manuscript, they will search for another subject-matter expert of equal renown and reputation in the field. Single-blinding applies to the peer-review procedure.

The reviewers will submit their recommendations and reports to the editor, along with general comments for the editor and both general and specific comments for the author (s). Anonymous feedback that could aid authors in enhancing their work is communicated (even if editor do not accept the submitted manuscript). The editor then evaluates them collectively and decides whether or not to reject the manuscript, either independently or in consultation with other editors. The Editors-in-Chief have the final say regarding publication acceptability.

Authors should receive acknowledgment of receipt of their articles after three weeks of submission. If the article passes the Editorial initial screening, the article without author's details is sent to two anonymous reviewers (double-blind peer review), and the process takes about three to four months.