Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Office.

The manuscript is evaluated for:

• Scope and relevance to biomedical engineering and smart healthcare
• Originality and plagiarism (using standard plagiarism detection tools)
• Formatting and adherence to author guidelines

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be desk rejected or returned to the authors for necessary corrections.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate Handling Editor based on subject expertise.

The editor evaluates:

• Scientific quality and technical merit
• Novelty and originality
• Relevance to the journal’s scope
• Suitability for peer review

The assigned editor selects two to three independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.

Reviewers are chosen based on:

• Subject expertise in biomedical engineering or healthcare technologies
• Strong research and publication background
• No conflicts of interest with the authors or the work

The manuscript is sent to reviewers under a double-blind review system.

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

• Scientific rigor and originality
• Methodological soundness
• Clarity and organization of the content
• Relevance to biomedical engineering and smart healthcare applications
• Validity of results and conclusions

Reviewers provide detailed comments along with one of the following recommendations:

• Accept as it is
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

The editor carefully evaluates all reviewer comments and makes a final decision:

• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

In cases of conflicting reviewer opinions, additional reviewers may be consulted to ensure a fair and balanced decision.