[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
Publication Ethics::
Peer Review Process::
Indexing Databases::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Subscription::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
::
Google Scholar Metrics

Citation Indices from GS

AllSince 2019
Citations63123620
h-index2719
i10-index18679

..
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
Registered in

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

..
:: Peer Review ::
 | Post date: 2017/04/3 | 

Peer Review Process

Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences (JIUMS) is committed to the highest standards of peer review. The Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences (JIUMS) follows the policies and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and abides by its Code of Conduct in dealing with potential cases of misconduct.

     All manuscripts are subject to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality of their underlying research methodology and argument. After submitting the manuscript to the author(s) in the journal management system, the manuscript will primarily be studied based on publishing experts (maximum a week). Please follow the Instructions to Authors carefully to expedite the manuscript as precise as codification guidelines in the system and then submit it. If it is accepted in the first stage, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor-in-chief.
     Upon receipt of the manuscript, the corresponding author is notified and will receive the number under which the manuscript has been registered, the name and e-mail address of the scientific editor who will handle it. From this point onwards, authors should communicate with the editor-in-chief only about the progress of the reviewing process. The manuscript will be sent to at least two referees, and a reply may be expected at the earliest four weeks after submission. Manuscripts can be accepted, with minor or major revisions, or rejected. If the decision is ‘revision’, the authors are requested to take the remarks of the referees and editors into account. A second reviewing process can follow. Upon final acceptance, the authors provide a final version of the manuscript inappropriate file formats (not a PDF) (text as a WORD doc. and tables as Excel file) and send these to the editor-in-chief. The authors will then be notified when the paper will be published. Only one galley proof will be sent as a PDF file to the corresponding author. This proof must be carefully corrected and sent back within two working days.
     A weekly e-mail will be submitted to the reviewers, and the manuscript will be given back due to lack of manuscript review after one month, then it will be sent to another reviewer. Based on the level of the requested modifications, the viewpoints of reviewers, and the accuracy and speed of the modifications done by authors, being accepted in this publication takes about one year (in case of final approval by reviewers). Secretary specialist and scientific committee based on relevant content and subject. This stage will usually take two months. After the third phase acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to two reviewers, and then the review process of the manuscript is as follows:

- If two reviewers reject a manuscript, it will be disapproved;
- If the opinion of the two reviews is the total revision of the manuscript, the manuscript will be submitted to the author for revision;
- If a reviewer's opinion is a general revision and the second one rejects the manuscript, the essay will be submitted to the third reviewer, and according to his/her idea relevant to the first and second item, the decision will be made.
- When the author modified the manuscript and submitted it, the manuscript would be given to another reviewer for comparative assessment.

 

Editorial Review and Publication

JIUMS’s authors will be sent notifications of the manuscript’s receipt and editorial decisions by email. During the peer-reviewing process, authors can check the status of their manuscripts via the Online Manuscript Submission System.
     All submissions to the JIUMS go through a double-blind peer-review process to ensure content quality. In the first stage, a technical editor checks the format and style of the manuscript to assure its compatibility with the JIUMS’s guide for authors. If the authors have not considered the guides, the manuscript will be sent back to the authors for compatibility. The manuscript will be then assigned to section editors, based on the subject area and editor-in-chief decision. Section editors check the manuscript for content quality (with a focus on methodology, originality, and contribution to knowledge and practice) and the use of English. The decision at this stage is fast reject, revise and re-submit, or assign to external reviewers for a detailed evaluation process. The selection of external reviewers is based on their scientific background and experience, previous works, authors’ suggestion, and expertise. Every attempt is made at the JIUMS to obtain at least 2-3 strong reviews on each manuscript. Editor-in-Chief receives the reviewers’ comments and sends them along with a decision letter to the corresponding author.
     JIUMS adheres to a double-blind peer-review process that is rapid, fair, and ensures the high quality of published articles. JIUMS’s reviewers are required to declare their conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review. The review process takes between 3 to 6 months.
 

The letter determines the status of the manuscript in JIUMS
1. Acceptance: the manuscript could be published electronically. Before electronic publication, the corresponding author should verify a proof copy of the paper.
2. Minor Revision: authors will receive comments on their manuscript and will be asked to submit a revised copy (showing all changes they have made to the manuscript using Track and Change or highlighted color) beside a response to the reviewer file in which they need to respond to each and every comment of reviewer one by one (for each reviewer separately). Revisions should be submitted within 6 weeks after the decision letter.
3. Major Revision: it means a chance to reorganize the manuscript to meet the required scientific criteria for another review process. Here also authors are asked to submit a revised copy (showing all changes they have made to the manuscript using Track and Change or highlighted color) beside a response to the reviewer file in which they need to respond to each and every comment of the reviewer one by one (for each reviewer separately). Revisions should be submitted within 6 weeks after the decision letter.
4. Rejection: in most cases, methodological and scientific concerns are the main origins of rejection. Causes of rejection will be sent to the authors to provide more chances for them for publication in other journals. 
 

     



 

View: 4888 Time(s)   |   Print: 1262 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)
::
Click here to see all texts in Peer Review Process topic.
مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی ایلام Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.14 seconds with 44 queries by YEKTAWEB 4646