PEER REVIEW POLICIES
In all stages of our work, above all, ethics is our concern. Our emphasis has been mostly on the scientific rigor of the articles examined by publishing original and review articles, and case reports along with a comprehensive review. Quality control has always been one of the pivots of our academic structure. All submissions undergo a double-blind peer-review process. The peer review process from submission to decision is defined as below:
Submission of Manuscript: The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal through the journal management online system or occasionally through email.
Editorial Office Screening: The editorial office checks the paper’s composition and arrangement as well as check the “Similarity Rate”. Primary manuscript check is to evaluate duplicate submission, plagiarism, or other technical concerns. If manuscript does not meet the submission requirements, the manuscript is returned to the authors for corrections, or even rejected owing to ethical concerns.
Editor-in-Chief Evaluation: The Editor-in-Chief checks that the manuscript is appropriate based on the journal scope as well as novelty, scientific importance, and relevance to the journal’s general readership. If not, the paper may be rejected. Note: Articles submitted by the board, staff, and Editor-in-Chief will also be subjected to peer review. These types of papers should be handled by another person of the editorial board (without conflict of interest) and in all processes, those who have a conflict of interest should not be involved. Furthermore, in this case, the editor should be blinded to the reviewers' identity.
Inviting Peer-Reviewers: Manuscript that passes the initial screening is reviewed by at least two peer reviewers. The editorial office sends invitations to the experts who believes would be appropriate reviewers. All submissions undergo a double-blind peer-review process. Editors, staffs, and potential reviewers should present their conflict of interest.
The Conduction of Review: The reviewers submit their comments to the editorial office based on a comprehensive checklist, with a recommendation to accept or reject it, or else with a request for minor or major revision. Their comments will be passed to the authors following confirmation by the assigned editor including any relevant reviewer comments. The above review process may be repeated if a manuscript revision (major or minor) is requested. The responses to the comments along with the reviewers’ comments will then be evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief to reach the final decision.
All submissions undergo a confidential peer-review process. Originality, reliability, publication ethics, statistical validity, language, and relevance are important factors for reviewers to accept the submission. There is no warranty to accept the manuscript if authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit the manuscript. Rejected manuscripts would not be re-reviewed. All manuscripts are treated by the editorial staff, editors and assigned reviewers as confidential information. Reviewers’ comments are not published. The reviewers’ identity remains anonymous.
Author(s) may present list names of potential reviewers when submitting a publication, however, the selection remains the editor's decision. Relevant previously published articles must be identified by the reviewer if not cited in the references and constructive comments should present to improve the quality of the article. Also, any similarity regarding data or method with other previous publications must be reported to the Editor-in-Chief although the journal checks the similarity report of the text at the screening level by software. If there is any conflict of interest between the reviewer and the authors or with the research funder, the manuscript must be reviewed by another person. The peer reviewers are volunteers selected from those who have an impressive academic career.
We offer a special service entitled “Presubmission Enquiries”; therefore, those outside the scope of our journal are omitted in the initial screening phase. For this service, the corresponding author emails an abstract and a cover letter to the editorial office. We attempt to respond within one week with notes on the suitability of the proposed manuscript. The goal of the “Presubmission Enquiries” service is to make the statement that the received manuscript reasonably satisfies the measures detailed in the scope of the journal. Although there is no guarantee on our part to accept all submissions after the “Presubmission Enquiries” process, this service has made our acceptance rate reach about 60%.