Tlaiss Y, Hmayed J, Mneimneh M, Sarraf G, Gharios R, Zalzali I, Tarchichi A. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of optic nerve and chiasmal pathologies. World J Ophthalmol 2026; 10(1): 119850 [DOI: 10.5318/wjo.119850]
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
The peer review report was very helpful, fair, and objective. We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s careful evaluation of our manuscript and the constructive comments and suggestions provided. We have addressed the reviewer’s remarks thoroughly and revised the manuscript accordingly. These revisions have improved the clarity, organization, scientific presentation, and overall quality of the manuscript. We are grateful for the reviewer’s valuable time and thoughtful feedback.