Editor
Prof.Dr. Ramazan Gökhan ATIŞ

Istanbul Medeniyet University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey

E-mail: gokhanatis@hotmail.com

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9065-6104

Associate Editor

Prof.Dr. Şenol ADANUR

Ataturk University, Faculty of Medicine, Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Erzurum, Turkey

E-mail: s.adanur61@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0859-1741

Associate Editor

Prof.Dr. Tevfik AKTOZ

Trakya University, Health Research and Training Hospital, Department of Urology, Edirne, Turkey

E-mail: taktoz01@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1758-9996

Associate Editor

Assoc.Prof. Mert Ali KARADAĞ

Kayseri City Hospital, Department of Urology, Kayseri, Turkey

E-mail: karadagmert@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2454-8850

Associate Editor

Assoc.Prof. Hüseyin Cihan DEMIREL

İstanbul Aydın University Health Practice and Research Center, Medical Park Florya Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey

E-mail: drhcdemirel@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7378-5599

Biostatistical Editor

Assoc.Prof. Aytaç AKÇAY

Ankara University, Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Biostatistic (Veterinary), Ankara, Turkey

E-mail: aytacakcay@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6263-5181

Assoc.Prof. Mithat Ekşi
Istanbul S.B.U. Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk SUAM Bakırköy / Istanbul, Türkiye

E-mail: mithat_eksi@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1490-3756

Language Editor
Asst.Prof. Meftun ÇULPAN
Istanbul Medeniyet University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey

E-mail: mculpan@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8573-1192

Copy Editor
M.D. Mehmet Çağlar ÇAKICI
Istanbul Medeniyet University, Göztepe Prof.Dr.Süleyman Yalçın City Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey

E-mail: mcaglarcakici@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0176-5887

Job Description

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board Members

• Review submitted manuscripts.
• Advise on journal policy and scope.
• Identify topics for special issues, which they may guest edit.
• Attract new authors and submissions.
• Assist the editor(s) in decision making over issues such as plagiarism claims and submissions where reviewers can’t agree on a decision.

Responsibilities of the Editor

• Editors have full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
• To decide which articles will be edited for publication.
• To review and edit articles, provide comments and suggest titles to improve the text.
• To work to ensure and maintain the journal’s execution.
• To have the referees designate the evaluation process of the articles.
• Examine the layout of the drafts of the articles in writing and review.
• To make suggestions for editing and rewriting articles, some of which may be rejected or returned to the author for review.
• Checking that the last checks and arrangements have been made before printing.

Responsibilities of the Associate Editor

• To maintain the highest standards of professional ethics and competence.
• Supervise the editing of articles for each issue in accordance with the rules of scientific writing and layout.
• Collobrate with the Editors-in-Chief to identify and recruit new Editors and Editorial Board members for the journal.
• Make editorial decisions with appropriate speed and communicate clearly and constructively.
• Monitor journal and competitor statistics in accordance with established best practice, prepare data reports and draft monitoring reports for internal and external reporting.
• Promote the journal at conferences and meetings.
• Avoidance of real or perceived conflict of interest situations.
• Suggest changes to improve the quality of the journal's content.
• Systematically evaluating review reports, making crucial decisions on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
• Deciding whether the authors have addressed the reviewers' concerns and ensuring final editing of the manuscript before approval.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers’

• There should be no disclosure or discussion of the material under review with anyone outside the review process unless this is necessary and has the approval of the editor.
• Reviewers' comments should acknowledge positive aspects of the reviewed material, constructively identify negative aspects, and suggest improvements.
• Reviewers are responsible for identifying strengths and providing constructive comments to help the author address weaknesses.
• Reviewers who recognise that their expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript is limited have a responsibility to make the editor aware of their level of competence. Reviewers do not need to be experts in every aspect of the content of an article, but should only agree to review a manuscript if they have sufficient expertise to be able to provide an authoritative assessment. A reviewer who does not have the necessary expertise runs the risk of recommending the acceptance of a submission with significant flaws, or the rejection of a valuable manuscript. The reviewer should decline to review in such cases.
• Reviewers' comments and conclusions should be based on an objective and unbiased assessment of the facts, free from personal or professional bias. All reviewer comments should be based solely on the scientific merit, originality and quality of the manuscript and its relevance to the scope and mission of the journal. Potential reviewers who are concerned about a significant conflict of interest should decline the request to review and/or discuss their concerns with the Editor.
• If reviewers have any interests that may interfere with their ability to provide an impartial review, they should decline the role of reviewer or disclose the conflict of interest to the editor and ask how it can best be managed.
• Reviewers are responsible for acting promptly, following instructions to complete a review, and submitting it on time. The review process is undermined by failure to do so. Every effort should be made to ensure that the review is completed within the requested time period. If it is impossible to meet the review deadline, the reviewer should immediately reject the review or ask if an arrangement can be made to meet the deadline.

Ömer Levent Tuncay
Pamukkale University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology / DENIZLI

E-mail: omerleventtuncay@yahoo.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4631-6337

İlker SEÇKİNER
Gaziantep University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology / GAZIANTEP

E-mail: iseckiner@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3858-7700

Ahmet Yaser MÜSLÜMANOĞLU
University of Health Sciences, Bağcılar Training and Research Hospital / ISTANBUL

E-mail: ymuslumanoglu56@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8691-0886

İsmet YAVAŞCAOĞLU
Uludağ University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology / BURSA

E-mail: ismet@uludag.edu.tr

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1788-1997

Hasan BAKIRTAŞ

Private Clinic / Atatürk Boulevard No:185/9 Kavaklıdere/Çankaya / ANKARA

E-mail: hasanbakirtas@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7130-747X