Rajendran RL, Mahajan AA, ArulJothi KN, Rajendran SNS, Gangadaran P, Ahn BC. Letter to the Editor: Exosomal circular RNAs from peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells as diagnostic and subtyping biomarkers in acute mesenteric ischemia. World J Stem Cells 2026; 18(8): 120369 [DOI: 10.4252/wjsc.120369]
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 am fully satisfied with the journal’s manuscript submission, peer-review, editing, and publication processes. The online submission system was convenient and user-friendly, while the editorial team communicated clearly and professionally throughout the process. The reviewers’ comments were constructive and helpful in improving the manuscript. I also appreciate the high quality of the editing, figures, tables, and final published article.