Peer review process

Independent review, constructive guidance, responsible decisions.

Eligible manuscripts are assessed confidentially on originality, relevance, methodological quality, clarity, and ethical compliance.

01
Review model

Independent assessment by qualified specialists.

Editors select reviewers for relevant expertise and consider all reports before making an independent decision. The journal’s configured review policy applies to every submission.

Editorial pathway

From submission to decision

  1. 01
    Initial screening

    The editorial office checks scope, completeness, presentation, originality, and ethical requirements.

    Editorial office
  2. 02
    Editor assessment

    A handling editor evaluates suitability and appoints independent reviewers.

    Handling editor
  3. 03
    Peer review

    Specialists provide confidential, evidence-based, and constructive reports.

    Independent reviewers
  4. 04
    Author revision

    Authors respond to every substantive point and submit a clear revision record.

    Authors
  5. 05
    Editorial decision

    The editor weighs the evidence, reports, and revisions before reaching a decision.

    Editor
Review standards

Principles behind every decision

  1. 01Confidentiality

    Manuscripts and correspondence remain confidential.

  2. 02Impartiality

    Conflicts of interest must be disclosed and managed.

  3. 03Respect

    Reports must be specific, evidence-based, and constructive.

  4. 04Independence

    Decisions reflect scholarly merit and journal standards.