Review model
Research articles undergo double-anonymized peer review. At least two independent reviewers assess each research article. The handling editor checks expertise, recent collaboration, institutional relationships, and financial or personal interests before inviting reviewers.
From submission to decision
The editorial office checks completeness, scope, anonymization, reporting, and declarations. An editor may decline a manuscript before external review with a recorded reason. Invited reviewers assess the question, methods, reasoning, evidence, limitations, and ethical conduct. The editor records a decision and the rationale in OJS.
Revisions and exceptions
Decisions are reject, major revision, minor revision, or accept. Revised manuscripts include a point-by-point response. Substantial revisions may return to reviewers. Editorials and commentaries receive editorial assessment; the review status of each article type is disclosed. Invited work and society submissions follow the same relevant standards.
Confidentiality
Reviewers must not share manuscripts, contact authors directly, or upload unpublished text or data to external services without explicit permission and appropriate confidentiality protections. Conflicts must be disclosed before accepting an invitation and whenever circumstances change.