The International Journal of Tokat Medical Sciences (formerly the Gaziosmanpaşa University Faculty of Medicine Journal) implements a rigorous peer-review process in which scientific manuscripts are critically evaluated by subject-matter experts prior to publication. This evaluation process is both essential and indispensable for ensuring the scientific rigor and overall quality of the submitted manuscripts.
The evaluation of manuscripts submitted to our journal is carried out through a two-stage process consisting of an internal editorial review and an external peer review. Immediately after a scientific manuscript is submitted, the Editor-in-Chief or the Associate Editors assess its suitability for the journal’s aims and scope, as well as its adherence to ethical standards in research and writing. Manuscripts deemed appropriate in accordance with the journal’s publication policy are then forwarded to reviewers through the relevant section editors for detailed editorial assessment.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
The evaluation of all submissions through the “blind peer-review” process directly influences the quality of the journal. This process ensures credibility by enabling an objective and independent assessment of manuscripts. The International Journal of Tokat Medical Sciences (formerly the Gaziosmanpaşa University Faculty of Medicine Journal) conducts its review process in accordance with the principles of double-blind peer review. Reviewers may not communicate directly with authors; all evaluations and comments are transmitted through the journal’s management system. During this process, reviewer comments on evaluation forms and full texts are conveyed to the author(s) by the editor.
Accordingly, reviewers who evaluate manuscripts for the journal are expected to adhere to the following ethical responsibilities:
1. Reviewers should agree to evaluate a manuscript only if it aligns with their area of expertise.
2. They must conduct their evaluations impartially and confidentially.
3. If reviewers believe they may encounter a conflict of interest during the evaluation, they should decline to review the manuscript and inform the journal editor.
4. Reviews should be conducted objectively, focusing solely on the content of the manuscript. Nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political views, or commercial interests must not influence the evaluation.
5. Reviews must be written in a constructive and scientific tone. Hostile, defamatory, insulting, or derogatory personal remarks should not be included.
6. Reviewers must complete evaluations in a timely manner and in accordance with the above ethical principles.
Reviewers are expected to take the following points into consideration during the peer-review process and to evaluate manuscripts accordingly:
1. Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the manuscript?
2. Does the manuscript contain current, novel, and significant information?
3. Is the materials and methods section written in a comprehensive and understandable manner?
4. Are the results obtained in the manuscript adequately supported by the findings, and are the interpretations justified?
5. Does the manuscript provide sufficient references to other studies in the field?
6. Is the quality and clarity of the language used in the manuscript adequate?

If both reviewer reports are positive, the manuscript is accepted for publication upon the decision of the Editor-in-Chief. If one of the two reviewers submits a negative recommendation, the manuscript is referred to a third reviewer. Manuscripts may be published only if at least two reviewers recommend acceptance. Throughout the entire process, external reviewers do not learn the identity of the author, and authors do not learn the identities of the reviewers.