Peer Review Process Policy

All submissions to MACC, except Letters from the Editor, undergo double-blind peer review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. Manuscripts are initially assessed by the editorial team for suitability, completeness, and compliance with the journal’s submission requirements before being assigned to reviewers.

Reviewers provide recommendations, which are evaluated by the editors. Editorial decisions and reviewer comments are communicated to the corresponding author, and revised manuscripts may undergo further review when necessary. The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor without a conflict of interest.

Letters from the Editor undergo internal editorial assessment and are not subject to external peer review. Authors do not assess or make publication decisions on their own manuscripts. When the Editor-in-Chief is an author, these responsibilities are delegated to another editor without a conflict of interest.

Before publication, the corresponding author must review and approve the final proofs. All authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to uphold the journal’s publication ethics and confidentiality requirements throughout the editorial and publication process.