All submitted manuscripts are briefly reviewed by the Co-Editors for quality, scientific importance, and relevance to the journal’s general readership. Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication or those that are outside the scope of the journal are rejected promptly. Manuscripts are then reviewed by two to three external peer reviewers and one Co-Editor. In most cases, the authors are requested to make changes to their manuscript after reviewing comments from reviewers. Upon receiving the revised manuscript, reviewers will make a decision on the manuscript. WJOemploys a double-blinded review process in which peer-reviewers and author identities are kept confidential. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than the editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review and must not divulge any information about a specific manuscript or its content to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors. All authors will be sent notification of the receipt of manuscripts and editorial decisions by email. Manuscripts judged worthy of further consideration are sent to two to three external peer reviewers and one Co-Editor.
Funding
Authors should list all funding sources in the “Funding” section. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of their funder designation.
Authorship
The journal follows theICMJE definition of authorship, which indicates that authorship be based on the following:
Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
