Han YM, Miao WW, Li XJ, Yang MX, Niu JX, Wang WJ, Xing YR. Self-acceptance in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: Associations with social anxiety and social support. World J Psychiatry 2026; 16(9): 121385 [DOI: 10.5498/wjp.121385]
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
Dear Editor and Reviewers,
We sincerely thank you for the thorough and constructive peer review reports. The reviewers’ comments have been exceptionally helpful in pinpointing both the strengths and the weaknesses of our manuscript. We have carefully considered every suggestion and have revised the text accordingly—adding new analyses, clarifying our methodological choices, and rephrasing ambiguous sections to improve overall readability. We believe that the revisions have substantially strengthened the scientific rigor and clarity of our work. We are also grateful for the encouraging remarks that motivated us to refine our arguments. We hope that the updated manuscript now addresses all the raised concerns and meets the journal’s standards. Once again, we appreciate your time and expertise.