BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Authors Evaluation
Li HX, Cao GZ, Weng YQ, Dong AL, Gao W, Zhu M, Che L, Yu WL. Effects of esketamine on perioperative renal injury in paediatric patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation. World J Gastrointest Surg 2026; 18(6): 119494 [DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.119494]
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
Looking back on this submission experience, I am truly satisfied and deeply grateful. Your journal’s submission system is user‑friendly, with clear guidance at every step, which significantly eased the burden for a first‑time contributor. The review process was also efficient and well‑organised; the time from submission to receiving feedback was reasonable and clearly communicated, leaving a strong impression of your journal’s professional standards. Even more valuable were the peer review comments, which were not only professionally rigorous but also courteous in tone. They pointed out the weaknesses of my paper while offering constructive suggestions for improvement. These comments prompted me to re‑examine my own research, and I benefited enormously during the revision process. I am fully aware that my work still has many imperfections, and it is precisely because of the patient guidance and tolerance of your editors and reviewers that this paper could be brought to its final form. I deeply admire your journal’s commitment to academic quality and its respect for authors. I would like to take this opportunity to express my most sincere gratitude to the entire editorial team and the anonymous reviewers. Should I be fortunate enough to submit again in the future, I will strive even harder to live up to your expectations.