All manuscripts will be subjected to the Peer Review Process (PRP).

The PRP involves the following editorial steps:

Step 1: Authors will be acknowledged of the receipt of their manuscript immediately and not later than 7 days after receipt of the same.

Step 2: The Editor-in-Chief will peruse the manuscript to determine whether the manuscript conforms with the aim and scope of the journal. If it does, the Editor-in-Chief will allot a Sub-Editor to evaluate the manuscript. The authors will be informed of this decision immediately or within two weeks of receipt of the manuscript. [However, if the manuscript is not suitable it will be rejected by the Editor-in-Chief. The authors will be informed of the rejection immediately or latest within two weeks after the manuscript was received by the Editor-in-Chief]

Step 3: The Sub-Editor will decide whether the manuscript (i) carries new or beneficial scientific information, (ii) conforms with the format of the journal and (iii) whether the manuscript is worth publishing. If he/she approves the manuscript it will be sent to Peer Reviewers for peer review.

If the Sub-Editor does NOT approve the manuscript it will be returned to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief may either reject the manuscript or send it to another Sub-Editor for re-evaluation.

The numbers of Reviewers recruited for peer review are usually 5. On rare occasions the numbers of Reviewers may be 2 or 1 if Reviewers could not be found to perform peer review. The Reviewers are required to review the manuscript within 2 to 3 weeks. More Reviewers may be approached if necessary.

Acceptance: If the majority of Reviewers are in favour of the article it will be selected/accepted for publication. The authors will be informed of the decision. The article will then be processed for publication.

Rejection: The article will be rejected if the majority of the Reviewers are not in favour of the same. Authors will be informed of the decision to reject the article within one week after receipt of the Peer Reviewers’ comments/reports.

Double Blinded Peer Review Process:  The reviewers will not know who the authors are and/or their addresses/affiliations. Manuscript sent to reviewers will not carry the authors’ names and their affiliations. Likewise, the identities of reviewers will not be revealed to the authors. The authors will receive the blinded reports of individual reviewer’s comments.