The journal follows a double-blind review process where the identities of both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous. Initially, the Editor evaluates the paper to ensure that it adheres to the journal's guidelines and is relevant. If the manuscript fails to meet these criteria, it may be rejected. If it passes the initial evaluation, the Editor selects at least two independent experts in the field to review it. These experts provide feedback on the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses and suggest improvements. The reviewing process takes up to three weeks from the date when the reviewers are assigned. We ensure that the reviewers are not influenced by the author's reputation, institution, or any other personal information. Throughout the process, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. After the review, the authors receive feedback, comments, and recommendations for revisions from the reviewers. If manuscript revisions are necessary, authors are strongly encouraged to address the identified issues promptly to facilitate acceptance for production. The Editor makes the final decision on whether to accept, reject, or request further revisions based on the reviewers' comments and the revised manuscript. The decision is communicated to the authors along with the reviewers' comments. However, the Editorial members reserve the right to make the final decision.