Submitted article to NEU DENT J goes through a three-step process: Preliminary examination, Scientific evaluation and, Publication Preparation. The Editors plan and implement these processes. These processes are planned and implemented by Editors.

PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION
Submitted article to NEU DENT J will be evaluated in the preliminary examination process by taking into account the following steps:
• While uploading the articles, a similarity report is requested from the authors. The similarity rate of this report is reviewed by the editor and its suitability is confirmed (Similarity rate should be below 15%).
• It is checked whether the candidate article is prepared according to the journal writing guide.
• The content of the candidate article journal, its scientific originality, suitability and topicality to the subject areas are evaluated.
• An English abstract is required in Turkish articles.
• It is evaluated whether the necessary files (Copyright Notice Text, Ethical Declaration Form, Similarity Report, Title Page and Main File) of the articles are uploaded in a complete and correct format.
Articles submitted to the Necmettin Erbakan University Dental Journal (NEU DENT J) are evaluated in three steps by the Editorial Board during the preliminary review process:

1. Editorial Pre-Evaluation Process
During the editorial preliminary evaluation, articles sent to the Necmettin Erbakan University Dental Journal(NEU DENT J) are evaluated by the editor / assistant editor in terms of the publication rules, scope and similarity of the journal, and whether the files to be uploaded are uploaded. reports of all articles submitted to the Necmettin Erbakan University Dental Journal (NEU DENT J) are evaluated. The maximum similarity rate acceptable for the NEU DENT J is 15%. If deemed necessary, the Editor / Assistant Editor may receive a similarity rate report from the related work again. After making the final decision about the study in the light of the similarity rate report of each study, the Editor / Assistant Editor shares this report and the decision with the author (s) when necessary. The errors in the report may be requested to be corrected by the author (s) or the work can be returned to the authors. In addition, the introduction, method, findings and discussion sections of the articles are evaluated by the Editor / Assistant Editor in terms of conformity with the scope and objectives of the journal. The Spelling Rule Control Officer is appointed to review the articles. Suggestions from the spelling rule control officer are re-evaluated by the Editor / Assistant Editor. As a result of the preliminary evaluation, the articles that are not in compliance with the publication and writing rules of the journal and the scope of the journal, incorrect or unoriginal articles are rejected without being accepted for referee evaluation. As a result of the preliminary studies to the articles deemed appropriate for the publication principles of the journal, the articles will be sent to the referees for scientific evaluation.

2. Evaluation of the format
In the examination of the format, it is evaluated whether the candidate article sent to the journal complies with the journal writing rules and template. Studies that do not comply with the journal's writing rules and template are not evaluated and returned to the author (s) for revise. The author (s) should upload their articles to the journal after making the edits within 15 days at the most. Accordingly, before uploading the work of the author (s) to the journal, he should examine the spelling rules and sample template file. As a result of the format evaluation, candidate articles that are not found adequate (appropriate) can be rejected or corrections may be requested. In the format evaluation, if the candidate articles that are not sufficient are not rejected due to their scope, the authors can apply again.

SCIENTIFIC EVALUATION PROCESS
The studies that pass the preliminary evaluation stage are forwarded to 2 referees who are experts in their field to be determined by the Editor /Assistant Editor. The referees inform the editorial board whether they can evaluate the study within 15 days at the latest after the article is sent to them. If the referees do not notification within the specified time, a new referee assigns for it. The appointed referees cannot share any documents or details about the candidate article they have examined with anyone. Referees who join the NEU DENT J referee pool are considered to have given a guarantee in this regard.
NEU DENT J applies the "Double Blind Review Method" in the evaluation process of the article. The Double Blind Review Method is essential for the objective examination of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals to ensure that scientific publications are produced at the highest quality. Referee opinions are the main determinant in NEU DENT J 'publication quality. The studies sent to the Necmettin Erbakan University Dental Journal (NEU DENT J) and decided to be appropriate as a result of preliminary examinations are examined by the Double Blind Referee Method. Double-blind reviewing means concealing the reviewers' identities from the authors and the authors' identities from referees. During the evaluation process of all articles, at least two referees assign. The time given to the referees for the referee evaluation process is 15 days. Referees can decide the suitability of a study by examining its corrections, and may request corrections more than once if necessary. When corrections are requested by the referees, the authors make their corrections within 30 days at the latest and submit their works to the journal via the same system.

The revised work is re-evaluated by the referees who request changes or corrections when necessary. In the event that one of the referees gives a negative opinion and the other gives a positive opinion, the Journal Publishing Commission may review the referee reports and decide to appointment of a third arbitrator /receive editorial opinion or the article is returned to the author. In order for the article to be published, at least two referees must give a positive opinion.


Referees evaluate the article using an online "Referees Evaluation Form." Also, if the referees deem necessary, they can forward the notes stating their suggestions and opinions on the full text to the Editor/Assistant Editor.
The referees regarding the studies can express their opinions in 4 ways:
• Broadcast is acceptable
• Acceptable for publication after revisions
• I would like to see it again after revisions
• Rejection

Review Result
Referees' views will be reviewed by the editor/assistant editor within a maximum of 15 days. Then, the chief editor sends the final decision to the author (s).

Objecting the Reviewing Result
The General Health Sciences Journal (NEU DENT J) reserves the right to object to the evaluation results of the author (s). The author (s) can send an e-mail to neudentj@erbakan.edu.tr or upload their letter from the DergiPark system within 15 days after the decision and express their opinions and comments about the evaluation result. Objections made are examined by the editorial board within 1 month at the latest. Regarding objections made by the author (s), a field expert referee is appointed. Firstly, the study is examined by the referee, then a final evaluation is made with the other referee opinions and the result is reported to the author (s).

PUBLISHING PROCESS
In the preparation process of the publication, the Final Reader is appointed for the final evaluation of the candidate article. The article is evaluated by the last reader for the last time in terms of form and if there are deficiencies in the article, it is sent to the author to make edits and to correct the deficiencies. After the edits of the candidate article are completed, the Layout Designer is appointed. The layout writer evaluates the article for compatibility with the journal template and brings the article to the publishing stage.
Candidate article that has been edited, it is published in an early view to be published in the earliest issue of the journal.
Early View
Article accepted for publication will be published in an early view according to the order of acceptance. During the early view, the authors should review their article and report their editorial recommendations to the editorial board in terms of journal guidelines and format. Articles cannot be changed after the journal is published.