Four preparation pillars covering structure, ethics, supplements, and revisions.
Manuscript Preparation
Structure for peer review and editorial readability
Submissions must include a descriptive title, a concise abstract, relevant keywords, and clean sectioning. References, formulas, and figure callouts should be clearly formatted according to standard academic conventions. Submit as a DOC, DOCX, or PDF file.
Ethical Declarations
Declare ethics, funding, and conflicts
Transparency is required at submission. Provide complete declarations regarding funding sources, potential conflicts of interest, and ethics committee approvals if human or animal subjects are involved.
Supplemental Material
Attach data and supplements effectively
Supplementary files should support peer-review evaluation. Extensive datasets, raw instrument readouts, and supplementary algorithms should be clearly labeled and attached during upload rather than embedded in the core manuscript text.
Revisions & Resubmissions
Respond thoroughly to reviewer requests
If reviewers request modifications, supply both a clean revised manuscript and a detailed "Response to Reviewers" document. Address every concern in a point-by-point format to minimize editorial reassessment delays.
The editorial workflow
From desk screening to published article — three gated stages.
1. Desk screening
Editorial Support Staff verifies your manuscript for scope fit, formatting quality, and ethical declarations.
2. Editorial assignment
Scientifically valid submissions are routed to an expert Editor with specific domain knowledge for assessment.
3. Peer review
The assigned Editor invites independent external reviewers. Decisions (Accepted, Revise, Rejected) are made strictly on scientific merit.