All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the highest standards of academic quality and scientific integrity. Upon receipt, the Editorial Board conducts an initial screening for suitability, the manuscript is then checked with plagiarism-detection software and presented to the scientific secretariat, and finally referred to a confidential review committee.

The journal operates a double-blind peer-review system in which the reviewer does not know the author's identity and the author does not know the reviewer's identity; reviewers assess the scientific content only.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Scope: the manuscript must fall within the journal's field.
• Novelty: it must present a genuine scientific contribution and answer an important research question, not derived from previously published work.
• Methodology: the approach must be clear, appropriate, precise, and current.
• Clarity and significance: clarity of presentation and importance of the scientific contribution.
• Conclusions: convincing and sufficient to merit publication.

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the Editorial Board decides to accept, request revisions (minor or major), or reject. The review process typically takes 3 to 6 weeks, though the duration may vary with reviewer availability and the nature of the research. Periodic turnaround-time indicators are published in the interest of transparency.