Comprehensive peer-review process is established to ensure only high-quality, scientifically rigorous research is published, and provide the authors with constructive feedback to enhance their work as following;

1- Submission of Paper:

The corresponding or submitting author submits the manuscript via the journal's online submission system. The manuscript should follow the journal’s provided template to ensure proper formatting and include all required sections as outlined in the Author Guidelines. Authors are encouraged to ensure that the manuscript is fully prepared, including figures, tables, references, and any additional files or supplementary materials.

2- Editorial Office Assessment:

After submission, the journal staff will perform a preliminary check to ensure the manuscript adheres to the Author Guidelines. This includes verifying the correct structure (title, abstract, keywords, body text, figures, tables, references, etc.) and formatting specifications (font style, size, margin sizes, etc.). The manuscript’s completeness is also evaluated, ensuring that all necessary sections are included. If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s requirements, the author may be asked to revise and resubmit before moving forward in the process.

3- Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC):

Once the editorial staff completes the initial assessment, the manuscript is forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC). The EIC will evaluate the manuscript for its suitability for the journal, ensuring it aligns with the scope and themes of the publication. The EIC will also assess whether the research demonstrates sufficient originality, novelty, and scientific interest. If the manuscript does not meet the basic quality or relevance standards, the EIC may reject it without proceeding to peer review. This decision will be communicated to the author promptly.

4- EIC Assigns an Associate Editor (AE):

If the manuscript is deemed suitable by the EIC, the next step is for the EIC to assign an Associate Editor (AE) to handle the peer review process. The AE is responsible for overseeing the review process, managing reviewer invitations, and ensuring timely feedback. The AE also provides guidance and recommendations to the editor-in-chief on the manuscript’s suitability for publication after the peer review.

5- Invitation of Reviewers:

The handling editor (AE) then selects and invites potential reviewers to assess the manuscript. The author’s identity remains anonymous to the reviewers. Reviewers are typically selected based on their expertise in the subject area and their experience in the field. The handling editor may send invitations to multiple reviewers to ensure a balanced and thorough review. The journal aims to have at least two independent reviewers for each manuscript to provide diverse perspectives. If necessary, additional invitations will be sent until the required number of reviewers accept the invitation. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest before accepting the invitation to ensure impartiality.

6- Review is Conducted:

The reviewers will assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including the originality, scientific rigor, clarity, and relevance of the research. They will provide detailed feedback, making recommendations to accept, reject, or revise the manuscript. If revisions are requested, the reviewers will specify whether major revisions (significant changes in methodology, results, or analysis) or minor revisions (small adjustments to improve clarity, language, or formatting) are required. Reviewers also provide constructive suggestions for improving the quality of the manuscript.

7- Journal Evaluates the Reviews:

After the reviewers submit their reports, the handling editor (AE) evaluates the feedback and makes an overall decision. If the reviews are conflicting, the AE may invite a third reviewer to provide additional input to help clarify the decision. The handling editor takes all reviewer comments into account, weighing the overall consensus, and then makes a final recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.

8- The Decision is Communicated:

The Editor-in-Chief will send a decision email to the corresponding author, outlining the decision and providing relevant reviewer comments. Depending on the decision, the author will be informed. The email will include specific feedback, including any necessary revisions or explanations for rejection. If the manuscript is accepted with revisions, the author will be given a clear timeframe for resubmitting the revised manuscript. The review comments will typically remain anonymous, though the specific anonymity protocol will be communicated in the decision email.

9- Next Steps:

• • Accepted Manuscripts: If the manuscript is accepted for publication, it is sent to the production stage for typesetting and preparation for publication. The author will receive notifications regarding proofs for final review and any publication fees that may apply (if applicable).
  • Revisions: If the manuscript is returned with major or minor revisions, the handling editor will include constructive feedback from the reviewers to guide the author in improving the manuscript. The revised manuscript will be resubmitted to the journal. If necessary, the manuscript will undergo a follow-up review from the original reviewers or the handling editor, depending on the extent of the revisions.
  • Rejected Manuscripts: If the manuscript is rejected, the handling editor will provide the author with the reasons for rejection, including the feedback from reviewers. Authors may be encouraged to submit the manuscript to another journal if it aligns with the scope and guidelines of that journal.
  • Reviewers: Regardless of the outcome, the reviewers will be notified of the final decision and provided with feedback regarding the status of the manuscript. If the manuscript is sent back for revision, reviewers should expect to receive the revised version of the manuscript for further review, unless they have opted out of continuing to participate in the process. For minor revisions, the handling editor may make the final assessment.