This journal is conduction an anonymous reviewing process so that the identities of authors and reviewers are not revealed to each other during the process. All contributions are initially evaluated by our editors for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are sent to at least two independent, expert reviewers who are responsible for evaluating the scientific quality of the paper. The editor is responsible for the information can be found on our journal website. To facilitate this, separately include: Title page(with author details): This should include the complete address of the corresponding author, including title, author's name, affiliation(if relevant). acknowledgment and statement of interest(question only applies where there are multiple authors and if there are any aspects of conflicting and/or opinions), and e-mail. Blinded manuscript(no author details): The body of the manuscript(including references, figures, tables, and acknowledgments) should not contain any identifying information such as the author's name of affiliation. 

After entering the electronic submission system, download the PDF file and attachments. There is no need to comment on style and form, just focus on the scientific soundness and logical interpretation of the results.  

Summarize the entire content of the manuscript in on sentence. Please write specific comments in the order of each section of the manuscript. Please note any page number referred to in the comment section. Comments should not include reviewer's recommendations on acceptance.  Consider whether peer-reviewed comments could improve the quality of the manuscript of the author's further research. 

It's a good idea to add both your manuscript's strengths and weaknesses. Here you can add the reviewer's recommendation on acceptance, including special comments to the editor.

1. All information obtained during the review process is confidential.

2. Please notify the editor if you have a conflict of interest, including but not limited to:

- Reviewers are competitor(s).

- Reviewers may have animosity towards authors.

- Reviewers can benefit financially from their work.

In the event of any of the above conflicts of interest, reviewers must decline to review the article.

If reviewers still wish to review the article, you must disclose the conflict of interest.

A history of previous collaboration of even a close relationship with the author is not considered a violation of the ethics guidelines for the reviewer.

3. Reviewers must not use materials of data from the manuscript for the review. However, it is possible to use the public data of the manuscript even after publication. 

4. Post review work by the editorial board

Review comments and decision can be analyzes in the editorial room without identifying the reviewers.