1. Submission and administrative checks

The Editorial Office checks that the required files and metadata are present, that the manuscript is suitable for anonymized review and that the necessary declarations and supporting documents have been supplied. Incomplete submissions may be returned for clarification. Administrative checks do not constitute acceptance or a favorable scientific assessment.

2. Initial editorial assessment

An editor assesses scope, scientific contribution, methodological adequacy and ethical acceptability. A manuscript may be declined without external review if it is outside the remit or has fundamental limitations that cannot reasonably be addressed through revision. The editor may request additional information about data provenance, approval, registration or research materials before proceeding.

3. External peer review

Research and review articles selected for further consideration undergo double-anonymous external peer review. Reviewers assess the scientific question, design, analysis, interpretation and reporting. The editor may seek additional methodological or statistical expertise. See Peer Review for reviewer responsibilities and decision procedures.

4. Decision and revision

The editor communicates a decision with the relevant reviewer comments. A revision is not a promise of acceptance. Authors should respond to each substantive comment, indicate changes and justify any disagreement. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers or assessed by the editor. Appeals must identify a material error or procedural concern and follow Complaints & Appeals.

5. Acceptance, rights and production

Formal acceptance is issued by the editor only when the scientific and ethical requirements have been met. The standard APC of USD 350 is then addressed separately through publication administration. Any agreed waiver or discount should be documented. Authors retain copyright and confirm the publication license. The accepted article proceeds to editorial production and author proof review.

At proof stage, check author details, scientific notation, tables, figures and production changes. Substantive changes to results or conclusions require editorial approval and may require renewed assessment. After publication, report consequential errors through the correction procedure.

Timing and communication

Assessment time depends on manuscript readiness, reviewer availability, scientific complexity and the extent of revision. HNCBT does not promise acceptance or publication within a fixed number of days. The corresponding author can follow the manuscript status in OJS and contact the Editorial Office when a clarification is needed.

Annual issue and rolling publication

The journal publishes one annual issue, formally released on 15 December each year. Accepted articles are published online on a rolling basis after editorial acceptance, production and author proof checks. Authors do not have to wait until December for their completed article to appear online. Each article retains its online publication date when included in the annual issue.

The annual issue date is a publication schedule, not a submission deadline or a guarantee that a particular manuscript will be accepted or published by that date.

Editorial review targets

These are editorial service targets, not measured performance statistics or guaranteed deadlines. Reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, additional review and research-integrity checks may extend assessment. The revision target excludes the time authors spend preparing their response. A first decision may request revision or decline the manuscript; it is not necessarily an acceptance decision. The journal does not promise a fixed submission-to-acceptance interval.