• ISSN: 2058-8356

Supported by

Review Process

Review Process

The journal follows a double-blind review to further provide the fairness of the review process; this means that neither the identity of authors will be disclosed to the reviewers nor the authors know the identity of reviewers. However, authors are still required to suggest five reviewers, of which two must be from the editorial board of the journal. A list of editorial board members is available at section Editorial Team with links to their biography to help a rationale selection. However, it should be noted that it is not necessary that your manuscript will be sent to to the reviewers you have chosen, and selection of referees will be at the discretion of the editors.

Please refer to the COPE ethical guidelines for peer-review. Reviewers should clearly reference the section of the manuscript (line numbers) to which they are referring in their response. While critiquing the manuscript, reviewers should acknowledge the authors’ time and commitment for the piece of work and therefore should be constructive. While identifying the deficiencies, clear suggestions to improve the quality of the manuscript should be provided.

The review should be submitted to the journal within three weeks to avoid delays in publishing the research on specified form (click to download), if for any reason the deadlines cannot be met, please notify the editors immediately so it could be sent to another referee.