Before publication each manuscript submitted to the Journal undergoes a thorough and rigorous peer-review. Final acceptance for all manuscripts is based on quality, impact and originality of research. We aim to complete the whole review process within 21 days. To expedite the review process, authors are encouraged to suggest at least six expert reviewers (provide full contact details and email addresses) for their manuscript and may also request a specific individual to be excluded from the review process (based on conflict of interest). Suggested reviewers should not be past or present research collaborators of any of the authors and should not be from the authors’ host institutions. The Editors will give consideration to the authors’ suggestions; however, their decision to choose or exclude a referee is independent of these suggestions and is final.

Manuscript review is undertaken in the following steps:

• Each manuscript undergoes an initial internal editorial review to ensure that the manuscript meets the scope and the style of the Journal.
• Manuscripts that do not conform to the scope or style of the Journal, are of insufficient interest and quality, or those that are not clearly written, are either rejected or are returned to the authors for a revision.
• On passing the internal editorial review, the manuscripts are sent to 2-4 independent external expert reviewers.
• Once all referees have returned their reports, a decision to accept, reject or revise a manuscript is made based on the referees’ comments and the editorial judgment.
• If applicable the authors are conveyed the reviewers’ comments and asked to answer any criticisms. In the case of substantial criticisms by a referee, the article may be sent back to the concerned referee for a second review.
• Best efforts are made to evaluate arguments given by the referees and the authors before reaching a final decision which rests with the Editor-in-Chief and is made as rapidly as possible.