Article Evaluation Process

Double-blind refereeing system is applied in the Journal and studies are sent to at least three referees unaware of each other.

In the process, neither of the authors and referees can have information about the others.

The descriptive information of the author(s) in the work is removed by the author and this informations could uploaded to the system by the cover page.

If this information is forgotten in the full text, it is removed by the editors and then sent to the referees.

The studies sent to the journal are evaluated within 15 days at the latest and the author is informed.

The editor and assistant editors of the journal may decide on the publishability of the study and the article may be rejected at the beginning.

Studies that pass spelling and grammar control during the pre-control process are then directed to referee evaluation by the editor.

Case reports are evaluated and published at the decision of the editor.

If the article is in English, it is sent to the journal language editors registered on the journal dergipark web page for language editing after the spelling rules inspection.

The time given to the referees for evaluation is 30 days.

Authors are allowed to make changes on their documents in line with the recommendations of the referees.

Dergipark system does not give authors the right to make changes on their documents before the referee evaluation is over.

If any of the referees has made a major revision decision for an article that has gone to peer-review, the editors examine the situation in detail in terms of the degree and applicability of the criticism/revisions, and if necessary, they can make a rejection decision at this step.

After the evaluation of the article from all three referees, these three evaluation are sent to the author together.

Referee evaluations are shared with the author in accordance with the blindness system.

Authors are given 4 weeks for minor and major referee suggestions.

If the responsible author of the article is informed about the technical correction and spelling rules three times, but the requested correction is not made, the article is removed from the evaluation process and this issue is conveyed to the author.

If there are two changes made in the referees determined for the article accepted for the publication process, the section editor becomes the referee to evaluate the relevant article without sending it to another referee for the third time.

Corrections from the author are checked by the relevant editor.

If one of the referees has given a correction, the corrected article is also sent to the referee who accepted it.

The editor, taking into account all these processes, informs the author of his absolute decision on publication or rejection.

In all articles that have undergone peer-review, the referee's opinions are conveyed to the author in accordance with the double-blind system, whether the article is accepted or rejected.

For an article to be accepted for publication, it is sufficient to receive an "accept" answer from at least two referees.

If two of the three referees reject and one of the referees accepts a major or minor revision, the article is rejected.

If one referee decides to reject, 2 referees major, minor or accept, the article is sent back to the referees.

The author/authors are not informed about the number or volume of journal publication of the accepted article.

The order of publication of accepted articles is determined according to the order of acceptance.

The final version/ proof of the article accepted for publication is sent to the responsible author for approval before it is published as a pdf template.

Care is taken to include data from a maximum of 5 years ago in published articles.

While responding to the referees on the Dergipark web page, the authors are requested to upload the article revision response letters to the system by specifying these referees in a different color for each referee and in the relevant correction text.