Liu L, Zhou YJ, Xu Y, Yin QQ, Wang JJ, Xu SJ, Yan LL, Wang ZZ, Li SW, Mao XL, Zhang Y. IGF2BP1 promotes gastric cancer progression by stabilizing HS6ST2 mRNA in an N6-methyladenosine-dependent manner. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2026; 18(7): 119282 [DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.119282]
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 gratitude to the editorial team, including the handling editor and the production staff, for their highly professional and efficient management of my manuscript. The peer review process was rigorous yet swift, providing insightful and constructive suggestions that significantly improved the quality of our work. I am also very satisfied with the smooth and collaborative online submission system. Thank you again for your excellent support in publishing our research.