Peer Review Process

• This journal uses a single-blind review process, which means that the reviewers know the identity of the authors, but the authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.
• The editor will initially review all contributions for acceptability for the publication. Papers that are found eligible are subsequently forwarded to at least two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the work, frequently under the supervision of a section editor with experience in the manuscript area. The editor is responsible for making the final selection on whether to accept or reject an article. The editor's choice is finalized.
• The editorial office initially reviews all contributions to the publication. At this point, papers may be rejected without peer review if they are deemed irrelevant to the journal's focus or do not meet manuscript formatting guidelines. This rapid rejection approach ensures that writers receive a prompt judgment and do not have to wait for the review process.
• Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be sent to the relevant section editor. The section editor may recommend rejection due to catastrophic design errors, unsuitable replications, a lack of uniqueness, or other serious issues. If suitable, the manuscript will be forwarded for peer review, often to two independent reviewers who will give feedback. At this stage, the section editor may propose rejection or acceptance, following which the manuscript and reviewer comments are forwarded to the editor-in-chief for a final decision by the authors. The paper will be returned to the corresponding author for editing in accordance with the reviewers' requirements. Authors have 30 days to finish and send the correction to the section editor. Failure to return the manuscript within 15 days will lock the author out of resubmitting the revision.

 Steps in the process are as follows:

 Manuscript Submission: The manuscript is submitted online.

1. Manuscript Submission: The manuscript is submitted online.
2. Prescreening: The editor checks the scope, format, academic value, and plagiarism within one week.
• If rejected, the author is informed by the editor.
• If accepted, it moves to the next step.
3. Peer-Review Process: The manuscript is sent for review and report (1-3 months).
• If rejected, the author is informed by the editor.
• If accepted, it proceeds for revision.
4. Revision:
• Minor Revision: The revised manuscript must be submitted within 3 weeks.
• Major Revision: The revised manuscript must be submitted within 4 weeks or more.
5. Second Review: The editor or reviewer performs a second round of review (1 month).
• If rejected, the author is informed by the editor.
• If accepted, the manuscript is approved.
6. Final Steps:
• Copyright and Artwork: The journal editorial office finalizes the manuscript (2 weeks).
• Final Proofreading and Publication: Final corrections and proofreading are completed, and the manuscript is published on the journal's website (2 weeks).

Post-Production Corrections

• No corrections to previously published papers will be made without an erratum or corrigendum (where appropriate); this includes articles in press and those published within an issue. This implies that any changes to a work that has already been published online will result in the publication of an erratum or corrigendum with its own DOI.
• If an erratum or corrigendum is published as an article in press or in an issue, the online version of the original work will be revised as well, and the correction notice will include this information. Corrections will be made only if the published information's academic correctness has a significant impact on the publishing record.
• Corrections to Supplementary Data by the authors are done only in exceptional circumstances. Because the extra data is part of the original publication, and therefore the published record, it cannot be modified if new data becomes available or interpretations change.