Each received manuscript will be initially evaluated in terms of quality, innovation, the importance of the issue, and compliance with the journal's standards by the editors to save the authors and reviewers' time. Then, in the case that the manuscript complies with the standards, the double-blind peer-review process will begin.

Each manuscript is sent to two specialized reviewers, if the reviewers differently respond to a manuscript, the manuscript will be sent to the third reviewer.

Please note that:

• • If the manuscript is not related to the journal's field of study, it will be rejected.

  • The reviewers have an advanced level of language proficiency and a high level of scientific competence in the subject area.

  • Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations.

  • Reviewers must not use confidential information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.

  • Editors ensure that decisions are based solely on scholarly merit and relevance.

  • The criteria for selecting the international reviewers include having appropriate experience in reviewing the related articles.

Authors can suggest the journal to send the manuscript to some specific reviewers or ask the journal to avoid selecting some reviewers by mentioning their names and mentioning the reason in the cover letter.

- All manuscripts are investigated through a double-blind peer-review process, in which the authors and referees do not know each other at all.

- The final decision on all manuscripts is made by the editor-in-chief of WJPN.

- The journal is committed to make a quick decision on manuscripts.

If authors believe that the journal rejected their manuscript due to errors or misunderstandings of the scientific content, they can send an appeal to the journal's office using the journal's e-mail.

Appeals Policy (How to Make or Submit an Appeal)

Authors have the right to request an appeal if they believe a decision regarding their manuscript was made in error or without proper consideration. The journal provides a transparent and structured process for submitting appeals while maintaining editorial independence and scientific integrity.

Grounds for Appeal

An appeal may be submitted when authors believe that:

• • The editorial or peer‑review decision was based on a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the manuscript
  • Important evidence or data was overlooked
  • Reviewer comments contained factual errors
  • There was a breach of fairness, bias, or procedural irregularity

Appeals will not be considered if they are based solely on disagreement with the editorial judgment.

How to Submit an Appeal

Authors wishing to appeal a decision must follow these steps:

1. Prepare a Formal Appeal Letter

The letter should be addressed to the Editor‑in‑Chief and must include:

• • The manuscript title and reference number
  • A clear explanation of the reason for the appeal
  • Specific responses to reviewer or editor comments
  • Any supporting evidence demonstrating that the decision was incorrect or incomplete

2. Submit the Appeal via Email or the Journal’s Submission System

Appeals must be sent within the time frame specified by the journal (typically within 30 days of the decision). Late appeals may not be accepted.

 

3. Await Editorial Review

The Editor‑in‑Chief will review the appeal and may:

• • Re‑evaluate the manuscript
  • Seek advice from additional reviewers
  • Consult another senior editor for an independent assessment

4. Decision on Appeal

The final decision will be communicated to the authors in writing.The decision after appeal is final and cannot be further contested.

Important Notes

• • Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
  • Appeals should be respectful, factual, and focused on scientific reasoning.

During the appeal process, authors must not submit the manuscript to another journal.

The journal reserves the right to reject appeals that lack valid justification or contain inappropriate language.

During Peer Review

Editors and reviewers may request access to the underlying data to evaluate the validity of the research. Any data provided during review will be treated confidentially and used exclusively for assessment purposes.

Revision

The manuscript may be returned to the corresponding author for language or scientific content edition.

- The authors should highlight their edits within the text in the revised manuscript.

- The authors should also send a letter in response to the reviewers' comments along with their edited manuscript.

- In the case that authors do not send their edited manuscript to the journal within a month, the revised manuscript will be considered as a new manuscript.

- If authors wish to re-submit a previously rejected article, they should also submit the original manuscript along with a letter about the details of the changes.

- The editing process of the manuscript may be conducted in several steps.

Proofs

The final version of the manuscript, before publication, will be sent to the corresponding author to check any possible typographical errors and other minor changes to avoid any mistakes. At this point, major changes such as new results or any change in values, title or authorship are not accepted in the manuscript. The corresponding author should send the final proof to the editor-in-chief within a week.