Peer Review Proccess

  1. This review for articel use double blind peer review
  2. Revealing whether the article has a clear, concise, and relevant composition as well as accuracy and originality, and interesting for the readers.
  3. Avoiding personal comments and critics
  4. Preventing direct contact from the authors without editor’s permission
  5. Informing the reviewers as soon as possible if they can not complete the reviewing  process timely and offering potential peer reviewers.
  6. Deciding on the scientific achievement, originality, and scope of works; showing how to improve and recommending acceptance or rejection utilising score valuation
  7. Considering all ethical issues, such as substantial similarities among the latest article with other published articles or other journals’ articles.
  8. Warning the editor on private conflict, financial, or conflict of interest issue and possible conflict existence
  9. Ensuring that the article which is published in accordance with journal standards
  10. Protecting the readers from wrong or falsification and unvalidated study by others
  11. Aware of failure to refer other relevant works by other scientists.