Peer Review Policy

A Triage/Screening Editor for the originality of work, scientific adequacy, and plagiarism assessed the submitted articles. We assigned the articles that fall within the journal and have an acceptable quality to a minimum of 2 external reviewers for peer review. In the peer-review process, both the author's and reviewer's identities are concealed from each other to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every article submitted to the journal. We give the assigned reviewers one to two weeks to respond to the review mail and a further one week to review the article. The average time for article review takes around 3-4 weeks under regular submission. The reviewers submit their reports to the Editor for further processing.

We then considered the articles for publication on the understanding that they are being submitted only to one journal at a time and have not been published, simultaneously submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere. Then the article is assessed, and the author is informed if the article has been accepted for peer review or has been rejected. If rejected, we will inform the corresponding author via email.

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can publish the article unaltered, consider after minor/major changes or reject the article. In case, changes as suggested by the reviewers, the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their article with the required amendments. We review the revised article after the changes have been made by the authors and accepted if it meets the publication ethics and author guidelines.

The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority to reject any article because of the inappropriateness of content, inadequate quality, or inaccuracy in results.