Deng CX, Chen ZM, Tang YX, Xi ZX, Wang SY, Wu HY, Xu B, Xu TC. Mazdutide: An emerging glucagon/GCG-like peptide-1 dual receptor agonist for obesity—a comparison of therapeutic effects and potential side effects with GCG-like peptide-1 inhibitors. World J Pharmacol 2026; 15(1): 113080 [DOI: 10.5497/wjp.v15.i1.113080]
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
We would like to express our sincere and heartfelt gratitude to the BPG team for their professional guidance, meticulous feedback, and invaluable support throughout the entire manuscript revision process. Their insightful comments on experimental design, rigorous suggestions for data interpretation, and patient responses to our queries have been instrumental in refining our work and ensuring it meets the highest academic standards. Without their dedicated efforts and expertise, this manuscript could not have reached its present form.
Reply from the Editorial Office
Thanks for taking the time to share this feedback with us. We would love to work with you again!