Manuscripts must be prepared in accordance with the Author Guidelines. Submissions may be returned without scientific review if they: (1) fail to meet all submission requirements; (2) are not properly formatted; (3) show signs of publication malpractice; and/or (4) cannot be accessed or downloaded reliably.

All submissions must be the authors' original and independent work. The Editor-in-Chief will conduct an initial evaluation to determine whether the manuscript aligns with the journal’s focus and scope. Manuscripts will be desk-rejected without peer review if they: (1) lack sufficient content; (2) exceed the word limit or have improper formatting; (3) are poorly written or unclear; and/or (4) show evidence of plagiarism. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor to manage the peer-review process, assessing the work’s originality, contribution, relevance, and overall quality.

Once a manuscript passes the preliminary checks, it will undergo double-blind peer review—meaning neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities. Peer review feedback is confidential and will only be disclosed with the reviewer’s consent. All manuscripts are subject to this process, and authors can generally expect a decision or a status update within one month of submission. If revisions are requested, the corresponding author is expected to resubmit the revised version within one month. Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor based on the peer-review findings.