For Editors

Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers apply their knowledge and experience as experts in the field, adhere to the principles of scientificity, objectivity, and impartiality, to review manuscripts for their originality, scientificity, completeness, feasibility, readability, future development, criticalness, and research ethics. This policy plays a crucial role in further improving the academic quality of manuscripts and leading the development direction of the discipline.

Editorial Board Members’ and Peer Reviewers’ comments on a manuscript and recommendations for its acceptance, submission to other journals, or rejection are the constructive framework for the editorial office's decision-making on the manuscript. When Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers write an in-depth and reasoned review report for a manuscript, it also serves a crucial role in helping the authors to further revise their manuscript, regardless of whether the manuscript will be finally accepted or rejected.

(1) Do the authors have academic integrity problems according to the peer-review rules, priorities, and standards?

(2) Does the manuscript topic fall within the scope of the journal? Is the manuscript structure clear and of good quality?

(3) Does the quality of the picture(s) in the manuscript meet the requirements for publication?

(4) Does the quality of the table(s) in the manuscript meet the requirements for publication?

(5) Are the references consistent with or closely related to the subject of the manuscript?

(6) Are the data and their analyses reliable? Can other researchers repeat the authors' experiments and reproduce their results?

(7) Will the manuscript’s content be of interest to readers? Are additional experiments needed for the study?

Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers’s comments should focus on the manuscript's scientific content, be in-depth and supported by reason, and be specific enough to provide the authors with important academic reference value in revising their manuscript.