All submissions undergo an initial desk review by the editorial board to ensure they fall within the journal's scope, adhere to formatting guidelines, and pass the plagiarism check (iThenticate). Manuscripts failing to meet these basic criteria are desk-rejected prior to peer review.

If the manuscript passes the initial screening, an anonymized version is sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the scholarly contribution and provide constructive feedback within a specified timeframe.

Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision, which can be:

• Accept without revisions.
• Accept subject to minor or major revisions.
• Reject (with clear reasoning provided to the author).

Reviewers focus their assessment on key aspects, including:

• Originality and novelty of the topic.
• Soundness of the scientific methodology and data analysis.
• Clarity of presentation and logical flow.
• Overall significance and contribution to the field.

In adherence to COPE guidelines, all peer reviewers are required to:

• Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript.
• Disclose any potential conflicts of interest immediately.
• Refrain from using research data for personal advantage.
• Report any unethical practices or suspected plagiarism observed.