Peer Review Policy

Double-Blind Peer Review

OAS Publications follows a double-blind peer review process, ensuring impartiality and fairness in manuscript evaluation. Under this system:

• The authors’ identities and affiliations remain undisclosed to editors and reviewers.
• Likewise, authors do not receive direct information regarding the reviewers’ identities.

This process promotes unbiased assessment and maintains integrity in editorial decision-making.

Review & Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts undergo rigorous evaluation by experts in relevant fields. Reviewers assess submissions based on:

• Quality and originality
• Academic standards and technical accura
• Documentation and formatting compliance
• Significance to the journal’s scope

Editorial Decisions

Following peer review, manuscripts may receive one of the following outcomes:

• Accepted Without Changes – The manuscript meets all standards and is approved for publication.
• Major/Minor Revision – Authors are required to revise specific sections based on reviewer feedback.
• Rejected – The manuscript does not meet publishing standards and is declined.

Revision Process

If revisions are required, the article is sent back to authors for modifications. Upon resubmission:

• The editor assigns the revised manuscript to reviewers for verification.
• Reviewers assess the adjustments to determine compliance with feedback.
• The final decision to publish rests with the Editor or Editor-in-Chief.

OAS Publications is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, and ethical review process that upholds the highest scholarly standards.