The peer review process is conducted in line with our journal's aim to provide high-quality, reliable publications that meet scientific standards. We implement a double-blind peer review system involving evaluations by both national and international reviewers. The final decision is made by the editorial board based on the reviewers' comments.

Article Submission and Confidentiality:

Articles must be uploaded in Word format to the Dergipark system to allow reviewers to add comments.

To maintain confidentiality throughout the process, no identifying information about the author(s) should be included in the manuscript (including images, headers, footers, acknowledgments, and notes).

Reviewer Invitation and Abstract Review:

Invited reviewers decide on accepting the review invitation by examining the Abstract section submitted in the Dergipark system. Therefore, the Abstract must include the purpose of the study, methods used, results obtained, and the author's evaluations.

Review Process:

If the article meets the formatting requirements, two reviewers are invited to evaluate it.

Articles receiving a rejection from one reviewer and a revision from another are rejected and returned to the author(s).

For articles receiving one acceptance and one rejection, a third reviewer is invited, and the final decision is made by the editors.

Revision and Final Decision:

Articles requiring revisions must be amended by the author(s) according to the reviewers' suggestions and resubmitted to the journal.

Revised articles should be in Word format, with different sections highlighted in various colors based on the reviewers' requests.

Explanation notes should be added to the revised sections, indicating which reviewer's comments were addressed and the rationale for any changes made.

The author's identity should not be disclosed in these notes.

Special Cases:

Articles may be rejected by the editorial board, independent of the reviewers' comments, due to excessive writing errors or failure to meet scientific standards.

If revised articles fail to meet the reviewer's standards and receive a second rejection, the editorial board will reject the article and return it to the author(s).