AOT mainly concerns the promotion of dentistry in Turkey (see: Aim & Scope for the details). The intended
population is mainly those involved in the dental profession, including
researchers, dentists, dental educators and students.
This journal does not charge any money under article processing or submission.
The journal provides article download statistics for the published articles in their relevant metadata pages.
The journal has been indexed by TÜBİTAK/ULAKBİM National Database (TR Dizin), Türkiye Citation Index, Turk Medline, Sherpa/Romeo, Ebsco, CrossRef, J-Gate, Google Scholar, OpenAire, ProQuest and DOAJ, and credited by TDB Continual Dental Medicine Education High Commission.
Provided that manuscripts comply with the manuscript preparation guidelines, they go through a reviewing process:
The manuscript is first seen by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the Editor (1). If the content or the quality of the manuscript is not suitable for this journal, the manuscript may be rejected at this stage immediately.
Depending on the topic, the manuscript may be consulted to an Editorial Board member for eligibility and consideration for further scientific evaluation (the list is provided in the Journal Cover and on the Journal website) (2).
If the manuscript is not recommended for review by the consulted Editorial Board member, the reasons why the manuscript was rejected are passed on to the author.
If the manuscript is recommended for review by the consulted Editorial Board member, first, it is checked by the Statistical Editor for the approriateness of the statistical anayses (3), then by the Technical Editor for the technical standardization (4). Afterwards, an editor is assigned to carry out the scientific evaluation process (Editor-in-Chief or Editor or Associate-Editor).
At this stage, the manuscript is sent to at least two blinded-peer-reviewers chosen by the assigned editor (5). The reviewers give recommendations to the editor as ‘accept the article as it is’, ‘minor or major revisions required’, or ‘reject’. In case there is disagreement between reviewers, the manuscript may be sent to (an) extra reviewer(s). The article can be published only after the required revisions are fulfilled by the author. However, taking into consideration the recommendations of the reviewers, the final decision belongs to the editor.
Note that a double-blind peer
review system is adopted in this journal; the reviewers and the author remain
anonymous to each other.
‘Conflict of interest’ and our management policies
According to World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) the definition and scope of conflict of interest (COI) is as follows: “In the context of medical publishing, COI exists when a participant in the publication process (author, peer reviewer, or editor) has a competing interest that could unduly influence (or be reasonably seen to do so) his or her responsibilities in the publication process. Among those responsibilities are academic honesty, unbiased conduct and reporting of research, and integrity of decisions or judgments. The publication process includes the submission of manuscripts, peer review, editorial decisions, and communication between authors, reviewers and editors”.
Various types of COI may exist. The most frequently seen types of COI include: financial ties, academic commitments, personal relationships, political or religious beliefs and institutional affiliations (http://www.wame.org/about/conflict-of-interest-in-peer-reviewed-medical). The existence of COI for particular submission does not necessarily mean that the article cannot be published in the journal; but requires effective management, and that the Editors let readers know of it. In this journal, conflict of interest disclosure is obligatory.
Evaluation of a manuscript when personal relationship exists (work partnership, friendship, superior-subordinate relationship, etc)
This is the most frequently encountered COI type in our journal. In this case, the Editor, having the COI, withdraws from the editorial process (WAME; abstaining from decisions where COI might arise).
Then, another editor (Editor-in-Chief, or Editor, or Associate Editor) who has no COI in that particular case takes over, and carries out the routine editorial process.
In case all Editors have COI, the manuscript is consulted double-blindedly to an Editorial Board member for eligibility. If the Editorial Board member does not recommend further evaluation of the manuscript, a rejection letter undersigned as ‘Editorial Board’ is delivered to the author. However, if the Editorial Board member recommends further evaluation of the manuscript, an editor is assigned, and the manuscript is taken to scientific evaluation. The final decision is given based on the reviewers’ recommendations. For an “accept” decision, positive recommendations of all or most of the reviewers are required, and the vice versa for a “reject” decision.
Evaluations of submissions from the Editor-in-Chief, the Editor or the Associate Editors
In this journal, the editors are actively involved in research, and all are potential authors. In case, one of the authors in a submission is the editor of this journal, then that person is excluded from the editorial process for that particular submission, and cannot attend editorial board meetings concerning their submission (WAME; exclusion of those with COI from the process; e.g., reviewer or editor).
In this case, the manuscript is consulted double-blindedly to an Editorial Board member for eligibility. If the Editorial Board member does not recommend further evaluation of the manuscript, a rejection letter undersigned as ‘Editorial Board’ is delivered to the author. On the other hand, if the Editorial Board member recommends further evaluation of the manuscript, an editor is assigned, and the manuscript is taken to scientific evaluation. The final decision is given based on the reviewers’ recommendations. For an “accept” decision, positive recommendations of all or most of the reviewers are required, and the vice versa for a “reject” decision.
This journal is published 3 times per year.
Order of the publication of the articles is decided according to date of the acceptation.
Open Access Policy
The journal is Open Access according to the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition. By this we mean that the journal's articles have "free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself."
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Acta Odontologica Turcica aims to carry out the publishing task in high standards. This requires universally accepted set of ethical principles to be adopted as the starting point. In this sense, our main reference is the ‘Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors’ published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
In this journal manuscripts are controlled for plagiarism (iThenticate) at pre-review stage.
Authors may submit a formal appeal for rejected submissions (e.g. if they believe that a technical error was made during review, or a pertinent point was misunderstood/overlooked by the reviewers, etc). Appeal letters must be electronically sent to: firstname.lastname@example.org. Editorial office is the only address for the appeals, and no means of communication other than e-mail is allowed. Authors must provide detailed reasons for the appeal and point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments. At this point, a revised manuscript must not be sent.
Decisions on appeals are final without exception. Priority is given to new submissions, so the appeal process may take longer than the original submission process.
Any inquiry regarding the editorial process should be directed in written form to the Editorial Board through e-mail: email@example.com