The Journal follows a standard peer blind review process.

• Authors are required to declare any conflict of interests with potential reviewers to the editor in chief while submitting the manuscript.
• Both the reviewer(s) and the author are anonymous in this model.

The review Process goes as follows:

1. The manuscript is first reviewed by the journal editorial office for compliance authors guidelines and proper formatting, language and editing standards
2. The manuscript may be subject to Plagiarism Check
3. An editor is assigned the manuscript and evaluates whether the manuscript can be sent to reviewers
4. If the manuscript can be sent for review, at least 2 reviewers are selected and sent an invitation that may include the manuscript title, abstract, and summary.
5.  If no response to the invitation is received, a manuscript can be rejected at this stage for lack of interest of the scientific community in the manuscript topic or presentation.
6. Upon receiving the reviews, the assigned editor can take the decision of acceptance, rejection, or revising the manuscript.
7. The editor in chief is finally contacted for approval or denial of the decision.
8. In case of required revision, the author is required to perform the revision, submit a revised version and the editor and reviewers previously involved may be contacted for re-evaluation following the same process above.