Peer review is a fundamental process that upholds the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing. At our journal, every submitted manuscript is carefully evaluated through a fair, independent, and confidential peer review system. This ensures that all publications meet the highest academic and ethical standards.

Peer Review Procedure

• All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to external peer review and editorial oversight.

• Each submission is typically reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.

• A double-blind review process is followed wherever possible, ensuring that reviewers are unaware of the authors’ identities and affiliations, while editors retain full access to this information.

• Authors can generally expect to receive a decision on their submission within 2 to 3 months.

• Following the initial review, authors are invited to revise their manuscripts in light of the reviewers’ comments and submit a detailed response addressing each point raised.

• All correspondence regarding a manuscript is conducted solely between the editorial office and the designated corresponding author.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Our reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the journal’s academic rigor and supporting authors in refining their work. They are expected to:

• Provide objective, constructive, and well-reasoned feedback to help authors improve the quality and clarity of their manuscripts.

• Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process and refrain from using or sharing any manuscript content.

• Avoid any form of personal criticism and ensure evaluations are based solely on the scholarly merits of the work.

• Identify relevant literature that may have been overlooked and alert the editors to any potential overlap with other published material.

• Decline review invitations in cases of conflict of interest, whether due to personal, professional, or financial relationships with the authors or institutions involved.

Ethical Standards for Reviewers

To ensure a fair and transparent process, reviewers are expected to:

• Confidentiality: Treat all materials as confidential and delete any copies after completing the review.

• Competence: Accept assignments only when they have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript.

• Impartiality: Base their assessments on scientific merit, without being influenced by the authors’ background, affiliations, or other irrelevant factors.

• Timeliness: Deliver reviews within the agreed timeframe to avoid unnecessary delays in the editorial process.

• Constructive Feedback: Provide clear, actionable comments that support authors in strengthening their work and avoid unnecessarily harsh or vague statements.

This peer review policy reflects our commitment to fostering an ethical, efficient, and collaborative review process that benefits both authors and the wider academic community.