Peer Review Process

Peer review is anonymous and double-blind in this journal. A scientific Editor will assess each contribution primarily for compliance with the guidelines and focus of the Journal. Submitted manuscripts are typically evaluated for publication by two or more specialists, as well as ethical and statistical Editors, within a maximum of two to four weeks of submission. Receiving reviewers' feedback is essential to the entire review process. The handling Editors' decision will be based on the reports from the reviewers. The editor will decide whether to accept suggestions made by authors for possible qualified reviewers. The author will be informed of the Editors' ultimate decision (s). Peer review helps editors select suitable manuscripts, however, the editor makes the final decision regarding all the content. Decisions may be made by issues unrelated to the quality of a manuscript, such as suitability for the journal. The editor can reject any article at any time before publication, including after acceptance if concerns arise about the integrity of the work.
The paper will be rejected if prospective reviewers are given intentionally fraudulent contact information, such as a phony name or email address.
Manuscripts selected for peer review will be refereed by two reviewers during two to four weeks according to specific research reporting guidelines for different study designs; including Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for randomized trials, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) for observational studies, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors better send their revised manuscripts within 2 weeks and if the revised version is not uploaded within 2 months, the submission will be archived.

  • Reviewers' and authors' identities are kept confidential.
  • The existence of a submitted manuscript is not revealed to anyone other than the reviewers and editorial staff.
  • Reviewers are required to keep manuscripts and their information confidential.
  • They must not use knowledge of the manuscript before its publication for their personal interests.
  • The reviewers' comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.
  • Reviewers should declare their conflicts of interest and decline review if a conflict exists. Knowing the author(s) must not affect their comments and decision.