Evaluation Principles
1) Articles that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal and have been approved by each author will be accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are screened for plagiarism using the iThenticate or Turnitin software.
3) Artuklu Health implements a double-blind peer review process. All submissions will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Articles deemed suitable will be sent to at least two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, and political philosophy. He/she ensures that manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a fair double-blind peer review process.
5) The Editor-in-Chief does not allow conflicts of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers.
6) The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final.
7) Editors do not participate in decisions regarding articles written by themselves, their family members, or colleagues, or articles related to products or services in which the Editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's normal procedures.
8) If reviewers suspect research or publication misconduct, they should report it to the Editor. The Editor is responsible for taking appropriate action in accordance with COPE guidelines.
9) Reviewers are given 15 days to complete the review process for our journal. This period may be extended by an additional 15 days.
10) The article review process in our journal takes an average of 10 weeks. Depending on the responses received from reviewers, this period may occasionally be extended beyond the desired timeframe. Articles that cannot be published due to this unavoidable situation are transferred to the next issue, provided that the process continues, and the author is notified of the situation.

Article Evaluation Process
The article evaluation process in our journal consists of four main stages: preliminary review, peer review, revision, and publication.

1- Preliminary Review
• The work is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules, and the APA 7 System, and is checked for plagiarism using iThenticate or Turnitin software. The similarity rate must be less than 20%. Manuscripts exceeding this rate are returned to the authors during the preliminary review stage.

2- Peer Review Process
• For manuscripts that pass the preliminary review stage, a Double-Blind Peer Review process is initiated. As part of this process, the manuscript is sent to two reviewers who are experts in the field for evaluation. Throughout the peer review process, the identities of the reviewers and authors are kept confidential, and the process is conducted in accordance with the principle of confidentiality. For a work to be published in our journal, both reviewers must give a positive opinion. However, if one reviewer gives a positive opinion and the other gives a negative opinion, the work is sent to a third reviewer for a decision.

3- Revision Process
• If reviewers request revisions, authors must mark the changes they make in their work in red. Revisions made in accordance with reviewer requests are first evaluated and checked by the editor, then by the reviewers.
• Papers that have completed the review process are reviewed by our journal's language editors. If deemed necessary, authors are asked to make revisions related to language and writing. Revisions made by authors are reviewed again by language editors and approved.

4- Publication Process
• Articles that have passed technical, academic, and linguistic reviews are typeset and laid out, made ready for publication, and published in the next issue.