Zhao R, Zheng JL, Wang Y, Lu BJ, Zhang Y, Deng BC. Cardio-hepatic axis in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: Mechanisms, clinical implications and therapeutic opportunities. World J Hepatol 2026; 18(10): 124748 [DOI: 10.4254/wjh.124748]
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
On behalf of all the authors, I would like to express our sincere gratitude to World Journal of Hepatology for the efficient handling by the Editorial Office throughout the publication process. The process was swift and smooth. The reviewers' comments on our manuscript were highly instructive, helping us improve its logic and readability. The newly added tables have enriched the content of our article and strengthened its clinical relevance. We also appreciate the editors' prompt responses—we were able to reach the Editorial Office at any time throughout the entire process. We hope to have the opportunity to submit to your journal again in the future.