1. Peer Review Model
The journal uses double-anonymous peer review. The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

2. Review Process Workflow
    1) Initial Editorial Check: The Journal Editor performs an initial quality check for scope, formatting, plagiarism, and overall suitability.
    2)Reviewer Invitation: If the manuscript passes the initial check, the Journal Editor invites at least two independent and qualified experts to review the manuscript. A third reviewer may be invited if needed. The Journal Editor may consult Editorial Board Members when selecting reviewers.
    3)Review Period: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and ethical standards.
    4)Decision Recommendation: Reviewers submit their reports with a recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject).
    5)Editorial Decision: The Journal Editor, considering the reviewers' comments, makes the final decision, which is communicated to the corresponding author by the Journal Editor. Editorial Board Members may be consulted during the review process.

3. Criteria for Review
Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts on the following criteria:
    - Originality and novelty
    - Methodological soundness and statistical validity
    - Scholarly significance and relevance to preventive medicine
    - Clarity of presentation and logical structure
    - Ethical compliance
    - Adequacy of references

4. Revision Process
Manuscripts that require revision will be returned to the authors. Authors must submit a revised version along with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.

5. Confidentiality and Ethics
All individuals involved in the review process—editors and reviewers—must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not disclose any information about the manuscript during or after the review process to anyone other than the editorial team.

Our peer review process adheres to the guidelines and standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).