Black Sea Journal of Health Science adopts a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the scientific validity, reliability, and academic quality of the manuscripts it publishes. The journal follows the principles of transparency, impartiality, and academic integrity while maintaining an efficient editorial workflow.
To provide a balanced combination of quality evaluation and timely publication, the average manuscript acceptance period is planned to be approximately 120 days. However, this period may vary depending on factors such as reviewers' response times, the number of revisions required, and the time the corresponding author takes to complete the requested corrections.
Initial Editorial Evaluation
All manuscripts submitted to Black Sea Journal of Health Science first undergo an initial editorial screening conducted by the Editors-in-Chief. During this stage, submissions are evaluated based on the journal’s scope, scientific contribution, originality, ethical compliance, and adherence to the journal’s author guidelines.
The Editors-in-Chief reserve the right to reject or return manuscripts to the authors without external peer review if they are deemed outside the scope of the journal or considered unsuitable for publication based on their scientific quality.
Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines may be returned to the authors for correction before entering the peer-review process.
For manuscripts submitted in English, authors are strongly encouraged to have their manuscripts reviewed by a professional language editing service prior to submission to ensure clarity and linguistic accuracy.
Peer-Review Policy
Black Sea Journal of Health Science implements a double-blind peer-review system. In this system, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed throughout the evaluation process.
This approach ensures that manuscripts are assessed solely on the basis of their scientific merit, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field, minimizing potential bias and maintaining objectivity in the evaluation process.
Reviewer Evaluation Process
Manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review by the Editors-in-Chief are assigned to a relevant section editor or directly forwarded to expert reviewers in the relevant field. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers from different institutions. When necessary, additional reviewers may be invited to provide further evaluation.
Manuscripts are sent to reviewers electronically through the journal’s online submission system, with all author-identifying information removed to ensure anonymity.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to several criteria, including:
- originality and scientific contribution
- methodological soundness
- ethical compliance
- clarity of presentation
- relevance and adequacy of the literature review
- interpretation and discussion of findings
If revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the author(s) through the online system together with the reviewers’ comments.
Authors are required to carefully address all reviewer comments and provide a detailed response to reviewers. Each comment must be answered individually, explaining how the manuscript has been revised. The response document should be uploaded in Word (doc/docx) or PDF format.
If authors disagree with any reviewer comment, they must provide a clear and scientifically justified explanation in their response letter.
Revised manuscripts, together with the response to reviewers and the list of corrections, must be uploaded to the system within 30 days. Failure to submit revisions within this period may result in the manuscript being treated as a new submission.
Final Decision
After the authors submit the revised manuscript, if the reviewers request to see the revised version, the manuscript and response letter are returned to the same reviewers for further evaluation.
This process may continue until a final decision regarding the manuscript is reached.
Once all reviewer reports have been completed, the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editors-in-Chief.
Manuscripts accepted for publication are first included in the journal’s early view (online first) section and then scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue.
Manuscripts that are not considered suitable for publication are rejected and returned to the authors, along with the reviewers’ reports and editorial comments.
Review and Publication Timelines
Black Sea Journal of Health Science aims to complete the evaluation and publication processes as efficiently as possible.
- Average peer-review duration for 2025: 72 days
- Average time to publication for 2025: 117 days
These timelines may vary depending on the complexity of the review process, the number of revisions required, and the reviewer's availability.