BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Authors Evaluation
Ahmed AEA, Hassan MH, Hamdan RS, Sakhr HM. Evaluation of growth hormone provocative tests in Egyptian children with growth hormone-related short stature. World J Exp Med 2026; 16(2): 117853 [DOI: 10.5493/wjem.v16.i2.117853]
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 appreciation to the editorial office and reviewers of the World Journal of Experimental Medicine for their highly professional and efficient handling of the manuscript evaluation process. The peer-review process was rigorous, constructive, and scientifically valuable, providing insightful comments that significantly improved the quality and clarity of the manuscript. The communication from the editorial team was timely, transparent, and supportive throughout all stages of the review and publication procedures. The reviewers offered balanced and detailed recommendations, demonstrating their expertise and commitment to maintaining high scientific standards. Furthermore, the manuscript processing and production stages were conducted efficiently, with clear instructions and prompt responses to authors’ inquiries. The overall publishing experience was smooth and well organized, reflecting the journal’s dedication to scientific excellence and author satisfaction. I highly appreciate the efforts of the editors, reviewers, and publishing staff, whose professionalism contributes substantially to the dissemination of high-quality biomedical research. I would be pleased to consider submitting future work to the World Journal of Experimental Medicine and would recommend the journal to colleagues in the biomedical research community.