BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Authors Evaluation
Zheng WT, Li GY. Letter to the Editor: Role of perioperative carcinoembryonic Antigen in guiding adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. World J Clin Oncol 2026; 17(8): 122727 [DOI: 10.5306/wjco.122727]
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 appreciation for the overall publishing and peer-review processes. The submission system was user-friendly, and all guidelines were clearly communicated from the outset. The review process was remarkably efficient: the reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback within the promised timeframe, which greatly helped us improve the quality of our manuscript. The editorial office maintained excellent communication at every stage, promptly addressing our queries and keeping us updated on the progress. The production phase, including copyediting and proofreading, was handled with great professionalism and speed. Overall, the entire workflow was smooth, transparent, and well-coordinated. We are very satisfied with the experience and would gladly recommend your journal to our colleagues.