Xu GW, Zhu XL, Yin CH. Serum NfL and GFAP levels and their association with anxiety-depression in Alzheimer’s disease patients: A clinical retrospective study. World J Psychiatry 2026; 16(9): 121407 [DOI: 10.5498/wjp.121407]
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
This journal gave our research the platform it deserved. The entire process—from initial submission to online publication—was handled with remarkable professionalism. Reviewers engaged deeply with our methodology and offered critiques that genuinely strengthened our arguments. The editorial staff were responsive and patient throughout every revision round. Having our work appear in such a respected outlet has opened new collaborative opportunities for our team. For any researcher seeking quality peer review and broad readership, this journal remains a top choice in our field.