Wang SF, Peng XW. Letter to the Editor: Metabolic reprogramming - unlocking the full potential of stem cell therapy in wound repair. World J Stem Cells 2026; 18(8): 118193 [DOI: 10.4252/wjsc.118193]
Evaluation of a Journal’s Credibility by Authors
The purpose of an author’s evaluation of a journal’s credibility is to assess the degree of satisfaction with the manuscript editing and publishing process. This evaluation is for user’s reference only.
1 Are you satisfied with the online submission system?
Yes
2 Are you satisfied with the peer review report?
Yes
3 Are you satisfied with the editing quality of the article?
Yes
4 Are you satisfied with the article PDFs?
Yes
5 Are you satisfied with the online full-text article?
Yes
6 Are you satisfied with the prepared figures in the online full-text article?
Yes
7 Are you satisfied with the prepared tables in the online full-text article?
Yes
8 Are you satisfied with the published articles processes?
Yes
9 Are you satisfied with the requirement for providing academic rules and norms?
Yes
10 Are you satisfied with the academic misconduct detection report?
Yes
11 Are you satisfied with the period of publication?
Yes
12 Are you satisfied with the editing and publishing rules and norms?
Yes
Evaluation of a Journal’s Peer Review by Authors
The purpose of an author’s evaluation of a given journal’s peer review is to assess the degree of satisfaction with the peer review process. This evaluation is for user’s reference only.
1 Are you satisfied with the time spent for peer review?
Yes
2 Are you satisfied with the anonymous peer review process?
Yes
3 Is the peer review report of great help to your manuscript?
Yes
4 Do you think the peer review report for your manuscript is fair or objective?
Yes
Author‘s Comments
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the editorial board, the handling editor, and the peer reviewers of the World Journal of Stem Cells for their exceptional professionalism and efficiency throughout the publication process of our manuscript (Manuscript NO: 118193). The peer review process was highly constructive and rigorous, which significantly improved the quality and clarity of our work. I particularly appreciate the transparent and streamlined workflow of the F6Publishing system, as well as the prompt and courteous communication from the editorial office at every stage. The journal's initiative to publish peer review reports and author evaluations alongside the article is a commendable step toward fostering open science and academic integrity. Overall, it has been a highly positive and rewarding experience. I highly recommend this journal to my colleagues and look forward to contributing to your esteemed publication again in the future.