Editorial Policies
1. Editorial Process
The publisher implements a standardized, double-blind peer review process in compliance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and The Recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to ensure academic fairness, objectivity, and rigor. The entire editorial process is transparent, traceable, and conflict-free.
Step 1: Initial Editorial Screening – The journal editorial office conducts preliminary checks on manuscript originality, format, topic matching, academic norm compliance, duplicate submission, and basic plagiarism. Manuscripts that do not meet basic publication requirements will be rejected directly with clear rejection reasons.
Step 2: Peer Review Assignment – Qualified manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent, qualified external peer reviewers with no conflict of interest with the authors. Reviewers are experts in the corresponding research field. Double-blind review is strictly implemented to ensure that neither authors nor reviewers can access each other’s identity information during the evaluation process.
Step 3: Peer Review Evaluation – Reviewers evaluate manuscript innovation, scientific validity, methodological integrity, logical rigor, research innovation, logical completeness, and academic value, and provide detailed review comments and explicit review decisions (accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject).
Step 4: Author Revision & Response – Authors revise the manuscript according to review comments and submit a point-by-point response letter. A maximum of two rounds of revision are allowed if further academic improvement is required.
Step 5: Final Editorial Decision – The editor-in-chief makes the final publication decision based on peer review reports, revised manuscript quality, and academic standard compliance. The final decision is independent, fair, and free from external intervention.
Step 6: Production & Online Publication – Accepted manuscripts undergo language polishing, standardized typesetting, and author final proofreading before official online publication.
When the editor-in-chief or the handling editor is one of the authors or there is a potential conflict of interest, the editorial office shall designate a member of the editorial board to assume those duties.
2. Editorial Independence and Non-discrimination Principle
The publisher firmly upholds full editorial independence. All editorial decisions are solely based on the academic quality, innovation, and scientific value of the submitted work. Decisions are never influenced by authors’ nationality, institutional background, academic reputation, funding sources, personal relationship, or commercial factors. The editorial team maintains absolute neutrality in academic evaluation and refuses any administrative, commercial, or external intervention in the peer review and decision-making process. No preferential treatment or discriminatory judgment is allowed for any submission.
3. Whole-process Supervision and Traceability Mechanism
The entire editorial process is fully recorded, archived, and traceable. The publisher establishes a dedicated editorial supervision mechanism to monitor the standardization, timeliness, and fairness of manuscript handling, reviewer performance, and editorial operation. All review records, revision histories, decision documents, and communication logs are permanently retained in the editorial system for academic inspection, quality auditing, and post-publication review. Any irregular operation or non-standard review behavior will be corrected and recorded officially.
4. Author Appeal and Re-review Mechanism
The journal provides a standardized and fair author appeal channel. If authors have reasonable doubts about the review results or editorial decisions, they may submit a formal appeal application with detailed academic grounds and supporting evidence within four weeks.
All appeals will be reviewed by a dedicated appeal committee independent of the original handling editor and reviewers. The committee will conduct a comprehensive re-evaluation, organize supplementary peer review if necessary, and issue a final, conclusive appeal result. The appeal process is transparent, impartial, and free of arbitrary judgment.
5. Post-publication Review and Dynamic Quality Control
The journal implements continuous post-publication supervision. Published articles may be randomly sampled and re-evaluated for academic standard compliance, ethical compliance, and data authenticity. If potential problems are identified, the editorial office will initiate investigation, verification, and follow-up processing including correction, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with COPE guidelines.
