Objectivity and intellectual honesty are the cornerstones of our peer-review process. In alignment with COPE guidelines, this journal requires comprehensive disclosure from all participating parties to prevent personal, financial, or institutional biases from compromising scholarly integrity.

 

For Authors:
Authors must declare any potential competing interests that could be perceived as influencing the research outcomes or interpretations. These include, but are not limited to, financial support (grants, sponsorships, consultancies, or stock ownership), personal relationships, or institutional affiliations directly related to the subject matter. If no conflict exists, a formal declaration stating "The authors declare no competing interests" must be included prior to peer review.

 

For Reviewers:
Reviewers are bound to recuse themselves from evaluating any manuscript where a conflict of interest exists. This includes instances of recent collaboration, co-authorship within the past three years, sharing the same institutional affiliation, or having a direct competitive or financial interest in the research outcomes.

 

For Editors:
Editors maintain ultimate responsibility for fair adjudication. An editor will step aside from managing a submission if it involves a close colleague, a family member, or a direct institutional competitor. In such instances, the manuscript will be delegated to an independent editorial board member to ensure an unbiased editorial decision.