This journal operates a Double anonymized review process. Contributions are typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. Editors, Editorial Board Members, and peer reviewers should ensure the process of peer review is fair, unbiased, and timely.

Editors should send the submission to the Editorial Board member at first for selecting peer reviewers. Then, send the submission to chosen reviewers for double blind peer review. After receiving the feedbacks from the reviewers, summarize the reviews and send them to the Editorial Board member to evaluate and make a decision (accept, accept with minor revision, rereview after major revision, reject). The following steps depend on the Editorial Board member’s decision. If it is accepted or rejected, just send the decision to the authors directly through the Editorial System. If it is accept with minor revision or rereview after major revision, then summarize the revision suggestions from the reviewers, and send back to the authors. When the authors finish the version, send it to the Editorial Board member to decide whether accept it or send it to the reviewers. In the end, send the manuscript to be accepted to the Executive Editor-in-Chief for final decision.

Editors are not involved in decisions about papers which they have written themselves or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures, with peer review handled independently of the relevant editor and their research groups. For submissions from Editor in chief, associate editors, guest editors and editorial board members, we ensure that the paper is handled confidentially by a different team member. Reviewers should be aware of any potential conflict of interest. If there is anything that might lead to bias or a conflict of interest, please notify the editors and refuse to review the manuscript. 

Editors should give entire, detailed, and clear revising suggestions for the manuscript to be accepted or to be revised. If the author disagrees with any changes made to the article, editors should give the author response to any complaints, and communicate comprehensively with authors to reach the agreement of changes.