Turk J Public Health aims to publish the top-quality articles related to the theoretical and practical application of public health sciences. A qualified peer review process to achieve this goal is very crucial for Turk J Public Health. Objectivity, accuracy, and fairness are basic principles during the peer review and publishing stages for Turk J Public Health. The trust of all readers, authors, researchers, referees, public health experts, physicians, funding bodies that support the research and public health managers are very important to us. All of the manuscripts have been sent to at least two reviewers and reviewers are blind to authors identities. Authors are also blind to reviewers identities. (Double Blind Peer-Review)

Double-blind refereeing system is applied in the Journal and anonymous manuscripts are sent to at least two 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 letter.

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

Studies that pass spelling and grammar control during the pre-control process are then directed to the editor.
If the corresponding 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.

The editor in chief and/or section editors of the Journal may decide on the publishability of the study and the article may be rejected at the beginning.

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

Corrections from the author are checked by the section editor.

The section editor informed the editor in chief that as (s)he taking into account all these processes, and informs the author of her/his final 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 and section editor.