-All studies conducted on humans must be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). In studies that may cause harm, the informed consent of the participants must be obtained.
- In all kinds of surveys and research based on measurements conducted on humans, ethics committee approval must be obtained from the relevant institutions.
- Authors cannot engage in actions that are against scientific research and publication ethics, such as plagiarism, forgery, and distortion.
How long does the publication evaluation process take?
It is anticipated that the publication evaluation process of studies sent to Bingöl University Health Journal will be completed within 6 months at the latest. However, the period between the date the reviewers or editors request corrections from the author and the date the authors complete the corrections is not included in this 6-month period.

First and preliminary evaluation process
This is the general evaluation made by the Editors, assistant editors, or field experts after the research is uploaded to the Bingöl University Health Journal system. In these evaluations, it is checked whether the research is publishable and can be sent to the reviewer in terms of general principles. As a result of the evaluation, studies that are not original, do not comply with ethical rules, do not comply with publication and writing rules are rejected. In problematic studies, the articles and principles that need to be removed, completed, corrected/edited are determined. The author is asked to complete these deficiencies. In this way, reviewers are determined for the problem-free articles to be sent to the reviewers with the corrected reviews.

Reviewer process
Reviewers can be determined from the reviewer pool by looking at the content of the studies and the areas of expertise of the reviewers. Reviewers can be suggested by a field expert or a member of the journal's editorial board. Reviewer candidates are examined and finalized by the editors, and the articles are sent to the reviewers appointed according to the double-blind reviewering system.

Double-blind reviewering and evaluation process
The double-blind reviewering method is based on the objective evaluation of scientific studies. In this system, our Journal uses a double-blind reviewering system in which the identities of the reviewers and authors are kept confidential to each other. For this reason, the names of the reviewers are not published. Authors and reviewers should make an effort to keep their identities confidential.
The double-blind peer-review process has an important place in the publication quality of Bingöl University Health Journal in terms of the author and the reviewer. The studies sent to Bingöl University Health Journal are evaluated according to the stages specified below.

Reviewer evaluation process
Reviewers are given a certain period of time for the peer-review process. Reviewers make their evaluations and submit their reports within this period. Correction suggestions from reviewers or expert editorial board members are completed by the authors in accordance with the publication principles and writing rules and within the appropriate time given. Reviewers can review the corrections of the study and decide on its appropriateness, or they can request corrections more than once and submit their final opinions/decisions.

Reviewer reports
Reviewer evaluations are generally based on the originality, method used, compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings and results, and review of the literature. This review is carried out according to the following elements:
Introduction and literature: It includes opinions on the presentation and objectives of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the subject, the scope of the literature on the subject, its currency, and the originality of the study.
Method: Contains information on the suitability of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, validity and reliability, as well as opinions on the data collection and analysis process.

Findings: Contains opinions on the presentation of the findings obtained within the framework of the method, the accuracy of the analysis methods, the consistency of the findings obtained with the objectives of the research, the provision of the required tables, figures and visuals, and the conceptual evaluation of the tests used.

Evaluation and discussion: Contains opinions on the discussion of the subject based on the findings, compliance with the research questions and hypothesis/s, generalizability and applicability.

Conclusion-suggestions: Contains opinions on the contribution to the literature, suggestions for future studies and applications in the field.

Style and expression: Contains opinions on whether the title covers the content, the use of language in accordance with the rules, and the structuring of citations and references in line with the examples shown in the journal publication and writing principles.

General evaluation: Contains opinions on the originality of the prepared study, its contribution to the literature and applications in the field, or publication and writing criteria. Reviewer opinions and evaluations cannot disrupt the general structure and characteristics of the study.
Editors' final evaluations and editorial board decision
The opinions received from the reviewers are reviewed by the field editor within a certain period of time. As a result of the review, the field editor communicates his/her final decision regarding the study to the editors. Based on the opinions of the field editor and the reviewers, the editors present the study and the evaluation and correction results regarding it to the Editorial Board. According to the opinion formed by the Editorial Board, they determine whether to return the article, have it published or have it corrected. They communicate these opinions to the authors without delay. They ensure that plagiarism reports are obtained for articles that receive positive opinions and follow up on the publication decision regarding the articles according to these reports.

Objection to the evaluation result
The evaluation result made by Bingöl University Health Journal is communicated to the authors. Authors have the right to object to the opinions formed as a result of the evaluations of the editorial board or scientific board. Authors can send their reasoned objection letters regarding the evaluation result to our journal's digital address in a scientific language and by citing their basis. The objections made are reviewed by the editorial board as soon as possible. Opinions can be requested from the relevant reviewers regarding the objections made. The authors are given a positive or negative response regarding the results. If the objections of the authors to the evaluation result are found positive, the editorial board or editors may assign new reviewers suitable for the field of the study. In this case, the reviewer evaluation process is restarted.

Process after acceptance
As a result of the evaluation made by Bingöl University Health Journal, the arrival and acceptance dates, personal information of the authors and the international author identification number ORCID number are added to the first page of the accepted studies. Plagiarism, bibliography, language and citation checks are performed, and the design and typesetting are performed. After these processes, they are published online with open access.

Language editing
Studies sent to Bingöl University Health Journal must be written in a plain, clear, clean and fluent language that complies with the rules of Turkish, English or Arabic language and their scientific literature, depending on the language status. Having the language check of the articles to be uploaded to the system will ensure that the publication processes continue more healthily in terms of fulfilling one of the acceptance criteria of the study. If this criterion is not met, the authors may be requested to have the language check of the study done/have it done during the evaluation processes or at the acceptance stage.