Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to Selcuk Medical Journal go through a three-stage process including preliminary review, peer review and preparation for publication. These processes are planned and managed by the Editors. The Editor and the Editorial Board endeavour to finalise this process within six weeks. However, this period may be longer due to unavoidable delays.

A. Preliminary Review
Articles are analysed in four stages.

1. Format review: The pre-screening editor checks the scope of the submitted article, the originality report, and the ethics committee approval, the copyright transfer, the conformity of the submitted article with the article template of Selcuk Medical Journal, the accuracy and actuality of the citations. The missing items identified by the editorial office will be communicated to the author.
Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's writing rules and template will not be reviewed and will be returned to the author(s) within a maximum of 15 days for re-editing. To ensure that manuscripts are prepared in accordance with the journal's style guide, authors should review the style guide in advance and use the template file.

Manuscripts may be rejected or corrections may be requested if they are deemed insufficient (suitable) after the format review. Authors may resubmit manuscripts that are not rejected for scope but found insufficient in the format review.

2. Plagiarism Screening: Manuscripts that comply with the journal’s writing and formatting guidelines are subjected to plagiarism screening by the journal using iThenticate software. The maximum acceptable similarity rate for the journal is set at 20%.

Following the plagiarism screening, the matches generated by the software are examined in detail through an editorial review process; properly cited references and legitimate quotations are excluded from evaluation. The remaining matches are analyzed to identify potential ethical issues and are reported to the Editorial Board.

Based on the plagiarism screening report, the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding the manuscript. When deemed necessary, the plagiarism report and the editorial decision may be shared with the author(s). Authors may be requested to correct the identified issues, or the manuscript may be returned to the authors or rejected.

3. Language editing: Language Editors review the submitted papers for academic writing in English.  They sent the results of Language Review to the authors. The editor may reject or request corrections to papers that are found to be inadequate by the language review.

4. Preliminary Editorial Review Process: Manuscripts that comply with the journal's publication and writing rules as well as the similarity rate are included in the preliminary editorial review. Editorial Board review the introduction, method, findings and discussion sections of the articles in terms of the aim and scope of the journal as well as compliance with the research reporting processes. The manuscripts that are found to be inappropriate, inaccurate or unoriginal in terms of the journal's publication and writing rules and scope are rejected without peer review.

In preliminary review:
  • A plagiarism report is requested from the authors when the articles are uploaded. The similarity rate of this report is reviewed and approved by the editor.
  • Manuscript is checked in terms of its accordance with the journal writing guide.
  • Manuscript is reviewed for suitability to the scope and themes of the journal.
  • Manuscript is reviewed for the conformity of citations and references to APA.
  • Manuscript is checked to ensure that the required files (Copyright Transfer Form, Ethical Declaration Form, Originality Report, Title Page and Main Article Document) are uploaded in a complete and correct format. You can access these files on the downloads page of selcukmedj.org website: https://www.selcukmedj.org/tr-tr/indirmeler/
B. Peer Review Process
In all submissions that pass the pre-review stage, the review process is continued in two ways:

  • Depending on the nature of the study, it is sent to at least two expert reviewers selected by the editors or associate editors. After the manuscript is sent, reviewers must inform the Editorial Board within 7 days whether they agree to evaluate the study. If a reviewer does not respond within the specified time, a new reviewer will be assigned. Once the reviewer accepts the invitation, the evaluation period is 15 days. When at least two reviewer reports are obtained, the process proceeds to the next stage. If a reviewer does not complete the evaluation within 15 days, a new reviewer is appointed.

  • In order to reach a sufficient number of reviewer evaluations in a shorter time, the journal may request more than two reviewers at the same time. When sufficient opinions are obtained, it is at the discretion of the editors to cancel other reviewer invitations without waiting for the evaluation result.

Assigned reviewers may not share any documents or details related to the manuscript under evaluation with anyone. Reviewers included in the reviewer pool are considered to have agreed to this confidentiality requirement. All reviewers must act in accordance with the journal’s reviewer guidelines. Click here to access the Reviewer Guidelines.

The review process is based on the "blind peer review". The Blind Peer Review is essential for the objective review of manuscript. It is favoured by many scientific journals to ensure that publications are produced of the highest quality. Reviewers' opinions are the main determinant of the publication quality of Selcuk Medical Journal. All manuscripts submitted to the Selcuk Medical Journal and found sufficient in the Preliminary Review are reviewed through double-blind peer review. Double-blind peer review means that the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors, and the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.

Reviewers are given 15 days for the review process. The reviewers can approve the correction after review, or request corrections more than once if necessary. When revisions are requested by the reviewers, authors must complete the revisions and resubmit their manuscript to the journal through the same system within 15 days at the latest. The revised manuscript will be re-evaluated by the reviewers, who request changes or corrections. The Editorial Board decides on the publication of the manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ opinions. In the article acceptance process, if the two reviewers' opinions differ, the decision is made by obtaining the opinion of the editor or a third reviewer. 

Reviewers may provide one of the following three recommendations regarding a manuscript:
• Accept for publication
• Revision (Minor or major)
• Reject it
 

The evaluation outcome and reviewer comments are examined by the editor(s) within 10 days. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on manuscripts for which all reviewer reports have been completed and associate editors have provided their assessments. In cases where serious research misconduct is suspected, the editors of Selcuk Medical Journal may seek the opinion of a third independent expert, and a detailed final report will be communicated to the authors.

Selcuk Medical Journal aims to reach a final publication decision for all manuscripts within twelve weeks after submission; however, this period may be extended due to unforeseen circumstances.

Objection to Decision
Author (s) have the right to appeal the results of the review. The author(s) should send an e-mail to [email protected] with reference to the opinions and comments of reviewers and upload it to the system within 15 days after the decision. Editorial board review the objection within 1 month. Another reviewer is appointed for the objections of the author(s). The reviewer analyzes the manuscript, then a final evaluation is made with the opinions of other reviewers and the decision is notified to the author(s).

C. Preparation for publication
Layout Editor makes the preliminary editing of the article in the process of preparation for publication. The layout of the manuscript is forwarded to the authors for proofreading before publication. The authors may be asked to make some adjustments in format and to complete the deficiencies.
Following final editing by the authors, the manuscript will be assigned for publication in the earliest issue of the journal. The paper will be published in early view in the assigned issue of the journal.

D. Early View
Accepted papers are published as Articles in Print (Online First) in the order of acceptance date. An article in early view does not mean that it will be included in the next issue. During the early view, authors are required to review their manuscripts and notify the editorial board of any suggestions for corrections in terms of writing rules and layout. No correction can be made to the papers after publishing.

E. Submission of Data to National and International Indexing Services

The data for each published issue are transmitted to the relevant indexing services within 15 day
 

F. Responsibilities of Authors

    Authors’ Responsibilities:

  • Authors must adhere to research and publication ethics.

  • Authors must not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.

  • Authors must fully and accurately cite all sources used in the preparation of the manuscript.
     

    Editors’ Responsibilities:

  • Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely based on their scientific content, without regard to the authors’ ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, or political orientation.
  • Editors ensure a fair double-blind peer-review process for all manuscripts submitted for publication and guarantee that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until publication.
  • Editors inform reviewers that the manuscripts they receive contain confidential information and that reviewing them constitutes a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board must not discuss the manuscripts with others. Reviewer anonymity must always be preserved. In specific circumstances, the editor may share a reviewer’s comments with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
  • Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the journal. When necessary, they are also responsible for issuing corrections or initiating retraction procedures.
  • The Editor-in-Chief does not permit any conflicts of interest among authors, editors, and reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority regarding reviewer assignment, and the Editorial Board holds the final responsibility for decisions concerning the publication of manuscripts in the journal.
   

    Reviewers’ Responsibilities:

  • Reviewers should have no conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors, and/or the research funders.

  • Reviews must be conducted objectively.

  • The language and tone used by reviewers must not be offensive or disrespectful toward the author.

  • Reviewers must ensure that all information regarding the submitted manuscript remains confidential until the article is published.

  • If reviewers detect any copyright violation or plagiarism in the manuscript they are evaluating, they must inform the editor.

  • A reviewer who feels unqualified to assess a manuscript or believes the review cannot be completed within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.

  • During the review process, reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript by considering the following points: Does the manuscript contain new and important information? Does the abstract clearly and accurately reflect the content of the article? Is the methodology clearly and comprehensively described? Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the findings? Are relevant studies in the field adequately cited? Is the language quality sufficient?