A comprehensive overview of our systematic approach to manuscript evaluation and publication.
The editorial process begins when a manuscript is submitted through the journal's official system.
Upon receipt, the editorial office conducts an initial screening to verify that the submission complies with the journal's aims, scope, and formatting requirements. If the paper meets basic criteria, it is assigned to an editor with subject-matter expertise.
The handling editor assesses the manuscript for originality, significance, and methodological quality. Suitable manuscripts are then sent for double-blind peer review to at least two independent reviewers. Editors oversee this process closely, ensuring that feedback is constructive and that the timeline for review remains efficient.
Once the reviews are received, the handling editor evaluates the reviewers' comments, communicates them to the author, and provides guidance for revisions where necessary. After revisions are completed, the editor reassesses the manuscript and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief regarding final acceptance or rejection.
Manuscript submitted through official system
Compliance check with aims and scope
Assigned to subject-matter expert
Double-blind review by independent experts
Editor evaluates reviewer feedback
Feedback and revision guidance provided
Editor reassesses revised manuscript
Editor-in-Chief makes final recommendation
Ensures impartial evaluation by maintaining anonymity
Streamlined process for timely publication
Helpful guidance for author improvement
Subject-matter experts ensure quality