Initial Screening
All submissions are first evaluated by the editorial team to ensure alignment with the journal’s scope, structure, and ethical standards. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage or returned to authors for revision prior to peer review.

Peer Review Process
Original Research articles and Case Studies are subject to double-blind peer review, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. If reviewer opinions differ significantly, additional reviewers may be invited to ensure a balanced and fair assessment.

Reviewers evaluate submissions based on originality, methodological soundness, clarity of presentation, and scientific relevance.

Editorial Decision
The final decision on acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewer reports and the scientific merit of the manuscript.

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by financial contributions, institutional affiliations, or personal considerations.

Non–Peer-Reviewed Content
Editorials, Practice Reports, Historical Notes, Book Reviews, and Letters to the Editor are evaluated internally by the editorial team and are not subject to external peer review.

These contributions are clearly distinguished from peer-reviewed research content.

Confidentiality and Ethics
All submitted manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.