The journal follows an unbiased, objective, double-blind peer review process which aims at accuracy of the data, content and confidentiality.
Reviewers help determine the significance, validity and originality of the work, and can suggest improvements to the manuscript. On their recommendation, Editor-in- Chief will accept without any corrections, accept with revisions, or reject a manuscript. The peer reviewer will look closely at the methodology and the validity of the data, and consider ethical approach. Reviewers review the manuscript objectively, and observations shall be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Peer reviewers use the checklist of the Journal to evaluate the content for scientific value and originality, to see that articles adhere to general scientific practice as well as the journal’s specific guidelines, and to check that author has referenced correctly. In case of a rejected manuscript, reviewers’ comments will be communicated to the corresponding author after stripping reviewer’s details from the manuscript. If an article is received from any of the member of the Journal Management (Advisory board, Editorial board, Editor-in- Chief, Patrons, Chief Patron, Managing Editor and Editor) appropriate confidentiality will be maintained.