Soin A, Mandava A, Soin G, Kloth D, Staats P, Kalia H, Kim P. Sacroiliac joint injections and radiofrequency ablation for pain management: A clinical review. World J Orthop 2026; 17(6): 120581 [DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v17.i6.120581]
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?
No
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
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the publication process. I am completely satisfied with the journal's guidelines, ethical standards, and comprehensive publication policies, which ensure high-quality research dissemination. The only suggestion I would offer for future consideration is to optimize and potentially shorten the peer-review timeline. A more expedited review process would greatly benefit authors by accelerating the communication of critical scientific findings. I appreciate your team's hard work and dedication to excellence, and I look forward to working with your journal again in the future.