The journal uses a double-blind review process where the identity of both the authors and reviewers are kept confidential. The Editor conducts an initial assessment to ensure compliance with the journal's rules and relevancy. Failure to achieve these criteria may result in rejection at this level. After passing the initial examination, the Editor chooses a minimum of two impartial experts in the subject to review the work. They offer feedback on strengths, problems, and propose enhancements. The review procedure lasts up to three weeks from the date the reviewers are assigned. We guaranteed that the reviewers were not swayed by the authors' prestige, affiliation, or other personal details. Both the writers and the reviewers' identities are confidential throughout the procedure. Following the review process, the writers are provided with feedback, comments, and recommendations for modifications by the reviewers. Authors are urged to swiftly resolve highlighted issues in manuscript revisions to expedite acceptance for production.

 

Final Decision: The Editor evaluates the reviewers' comments and the updated manuscript to determine whether to accept, reject, or seek additional edits. The decision is conveyed to the writers together with the reviewers' remarks. The Editorial members have the authority to make the final decision.