Upon reception, the editorial staff reviews each submission to ensure it is appropriate. Submissions that go beyond the journal's purview, are manifestly of inadequate quality, or omit significant sections may be rejected without a review.
Every paper that the journal deems worthy of consideration is invited to be reviewed by outside specialists, not just members of the Editorial Board. After obtaining reports with suggestions from at least two external reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief decides whether to publish the work.
While the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial office reserve the right to choose various reviewers, authors are urged to propose appropriate reviewers. We invite authors to recommend reviewers because they are the ones who know the subject matter best. The recommended reviewers might also be appropriate for other articles that deal with the same subject. Thus, having these names can aid the editorial office in making sure that the right people are contacted to examine each item.
To prevent bias, the journal employs double-blind peer review, in which neither the reviewers nor the authors are aware of one another's identities.
The Editor-in-Chief will decide whether to (1) accept, (2) minor revise, (3) major revise, or (4) reject after receiving at least two reviews. The writers will be informed of the rationale behind the choice.
The Editor-in-Chief retains the discretion to reject an article if it is decided that minor or major revisions are necessary and the authors do not adequately address the reviewer reports. Depending on the extent of the change requested, the articles that have been revised will either be forwarded for additional review or the Editor-in-Chief will decide what to do.
Due to the possibility of delays in receiving reviewer reports and the occasionally challenging task of finding qualified reviewers, the time required for review and decision-making is highly unpredictable. The Chief Editor and the editorial office strive to reduce the amount of time between submission and initial decision. The journal attempts, but is not able to guarantee, to render a first decision (after review) in 4–6 days.
Keep in mind that publications (such as editorials and letters to the editor) that do not provide original research are not subjected to an external review process; instead, the Editor-in-Chief decides whether to publish them.