Firat University Health Sciences Veterinary Journal adheres to research and publication ethics standards. The journal’s publishing processes are based on the impartial evaluation, development, and sharing of qualified scientific articles in various fields of health, including clinical and experimental research papers, original case reports, and invited literature reviews.
In this context, authors, journal editors, reviewers, and publishers must act in accordance with the guidelines and policies published by the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/).
Responsibilities of the Publisher and Authors:
Scientific studies submitted for publication in our journal are assumed to have been conducted in compliance with the regulations of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, and all necessary institutional ethical and legal approvals have been obtained. The journal management does not accept responsibility in this regard.
If the study involves the use of “Animals,” the authors are required to state in the Materials and Methods section that they have protected animal rights and obtained approval from the relevant ethics committee. This approval must be mentioned in the form of "Approval from the Local Ethics Committee has been obtained" or "The principles of the Local Ethics Committee have been followed." If approval from the Local Ethics Committee has been obtained, the authors must indicate the institution and the approval number. Our journal expects and supports compliance with the 3R (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) rule for the use of experimental animals according to European consensus-platform for alternatives strategies. If any different ethics committee approval or permission (e.g., clinical research ethics committee approval) is obtained, the evaluation process of the article will be paused until it is clarified.
It is the responsibility of the authors to obtain all necessary permits (e.g., wildlife study permit) from relevant institutions and organizations in accordance with international and national regulations before starting the study. The journal cannot be held responsible for this matter.
In the case of studies conducted within the borders of Turkey and turned into a manuscript regarding diseases that are mandatory to report according to the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock of the Republic of Turkey, a permit letter from the Ministry must be submitted along with the manuscript to be considered for evaluation.
The manuscript submitted by the corresponding author via the system is assumed to have not been published in part or in full elsewhere and not under evaluation for publication in any other journal at the same time. All authors are assumed to have agreed with the content and are in consensus. Any financial support or conflict of interest must be reported to the editor during submission.
The references must be numbered according to their order of use in the text and shown in parentheses with a single space after the citation. All references used must be listed at the end of the article, and all references must be cited within the text. In the case of six or more authors, "et al." should be used after the third author’s name (for English references). Journal abbreviations should comply with Index Veterinarius. The authors are responsible for any errors in the reference writing. Personal opinions and unpublished information should not be cited.
When preparing articles in Turkish, language and grammatical rules should follow the resources provided by the Turkish Language Association.
If there are institutions or organizations that provided support for the research, a superscript asterisk should be placed at the end of the article title, and a note should be provided at the bottom of the first page.
Manuscripts submitted for publication are checked for similarity using an appropriate program. Manuscripts showing a similarity of 20% or more will be rejected. Plagiarism detection may result in rejection of the manuscript even after acceptance.
Manuscripts submitted for publication are sent to the journal with a “Copyright Transfer Agreement” signed by all authors.
The authors are responsible for any corrections made in the published manuscripts in relation to the original text (ethical, scientific, legal, etc.).
Articles should be prepared and submitted according to the journal's writing guidelines (http://veteriner.fusabil.org/veteriner.php3?id=119). By submitting their articles, the authors accept that the submitted manuscripts will undergo a detailed evaluation process, and authors are deemed to have declared that all data in the manuscript is authentic and original.
Authors are responsible for making any corrections requested by the reviewers and editors in relation to their manuscript that has undergone peer review.
The decision regarding the publication of the articles deemed suitable for publication will be communicated to the corresponding author.
The articles submitted to the journal are published in order of acceptance. The journal reserves the right to change the order if necessary.
There are no fees charged for the printing and publication of articles. Authors will also not be paid for the publication of their articles.
### Responsibilities of the Reviewers:
Peer review is an essential element of scientific communication, contributing to editors' decision-making about publication and providing authors with suggestions for improving their manuscripts through editor communication.
At least two reviewers are assigned by the editor(s) based on the content of the articles and the areas of expertise of the reviewers. All reviewer reports are sent anonymously via electronic means. The names of the reviewers are not disclosed in the reports or the journal due to the double-blind review process. A thank-you note is issued to all reviewers in the last issue of each year.
If a reviewer considers the article sent for evaluation to be unsuitable or is unable to review it within the provided time frame, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor to prevent delays in the process.
Articles sent to the reviewers for evaluation are confidential documents and should be treated as such. The work should not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor (except in exceptional and special circumstances). Any unpublished data in the evaluated article should not be used by the reviewer in their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Any privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and should not be used by the reviewer for personal advantage. This applies even to reviewers who decline the invitation to review.
Reviewers assigned to evaluate the article must be objective and impartial. Personal criticisms that are not directly related to the article may be considered inappropriate.
Reviewers with a conflict of interest regarding the authors or institutions supporting the article must inform the editor and refrain from evaluating the article.
Reviewers must be familiar with any works related to the article that have not been cited by the authors. They should check for any derivations or discussions based on data reported in previously published works. Reviewers should also inform editors about any significant similarities or overlaps with other works (published or unpublished) that may be related to the article.
Reviewers who suggest revisions and believe the article can be published must have the opportunity to re-evaluate the article after the necessary corrections have been made.
Responsibilities of the Editorial Board:
The preliminary evaluation of the articles is carried out by the Editorial Board.
The articles are sent for evaluation to at least two reviewers by the Editorial Board. Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editorial Board decides whether to accept, reject, or modify the articles.
Once the article evaluation process is completed, the editor communicates the decision to the corresponding author.