Originality
The manuscript contributes useful new knowledge or synthesis within the journal scope.
Review stages
- Initial check: editorial office checks files, scope, declarations, ethical approvals, and similarity concerns.
- Blinding check: author-identifying information is kept in the title page and removed from the manuscript file before reviewer assignment.
- Editorial screening: an editor assesses novelty, relevance, scientific quality, and suitability for peer review.
- Reviewer invitation: qualified reviewers are invited based on subject expertise and conflict-of-interest screening.
- Peer review: reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide recommendations with constructive comments.
- Editorial decision: the editor decides to accept, request revision, seek further review, or decline.
- Revision assessment: revised manuscripts are evaluated against reviewer and editor comments.
Review criteria
Methods
Study design, sampling, procedures, and statistical methods are appropriate and transparent.
Ethics
Animal, human, consent, welfare, and conflict declarations are complete and credible.
Interpretation
Claims are supported by data, limitations are acknowledged, and conclusions are balanced.
Appeals and complaints
Authors may submit a reasoned appeal if they believe a decision involved factual error, reviewer misunderstanding, or procedural concern. Appeals are assessed by the editorial office and may be referred to an independent editor.