Instructions for Referees
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal is an up-to-date, peer-reviewed, and open-access e-journal. Published three times in a year.
The written language of the journal is English and Turkish.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal is dedicated to publishing scientific and up-to-date reviews.
The journal is based on the principles of independent and impartial double-blind peer-review. Only unpublished reviews that are not under review for publication elsewhere are eligible for submission. Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal does not accept multiple and duplicate submissions, even if the previous publication was published in a different language. Authors are responsible for the scientific content of the works to be published. Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal journal has the right to request any research material on which the review is based.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal encourages and enables academicians, researchers, and specialists to publish their valuable research in the fields of medicine and health sciences. The main aim of the journal is to publish high scientific and ethical quality reviews and to set a good example for medical publications worldwide.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal's Editorial Board and Publisher adhere to the principles of the International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Council of Science Editors (CSE), Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), US National Library of Medicine (NLM), World Medical Association (WMA), US Office of Research Integrity (ORI), European Association of Science Editors (EASE), International Society of Management and Technical Editors (ISMTE) and Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA).
All Reviews submitted for publication are evaluated for the following characteristics:
Current
importance
Quality
ethical nature and
suitability for the journal.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal uses a robust structured scheme for the review process.
The entire review submission process is completed through an annotated online submission system. Reviewers can access their pages with their passwords via the same web address.
Reviews that meet the journal's guidelines are sent to at least two external referees, whose opinion on the suitability of the article for publication is sought. The reviews are then re-evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board and a decision is taken to accept or reject the manuscript.
If the reviewers have any potential conflict of interest, they are required to inform the editor before agreeing to review the submitted review.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal is committed to the highest standards of research and publication ethics. In case of any ethical misconduct, the editors will act according to the relevant international publication guidelines (i.e. COPE guidelines, ICMJE Recommendations, CSE White Paper on Publication Ethics, WAME resources, WMA policies, and ORI). The Editorial Board of the journal encourages its referees to investigate possible research or publication irregularities such as unethical research design, duplication, plagiarism, etc.
Plagiarism is a serious problem and the most common ethical problem affecting medical writing. Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal does not allow any form of plagiarism. In accordance with our journal policy, submitted manuscripts are screened at least twice (during the review process and after acceptance) with plagiarism software to detect overlapping and similar texts (iThenticate and others). If the reviewers have any suspicions, the editors can provide the information obtained by plagiarism scanning tools to the reviewers.
During the peer review process, reviews with a similarity rate of more than 20% will be returned to the author with a request to handle citations in appropriate ways, use quotation marks to indicate direct quotations or rewrite. If the similarity rate between the reviews is too high for revision, the manuscript may be rejected. Textual similarity resulting from the use of common terminologies and methodological details of the reviews should not raise serious ethical concerns.
Approval of research protocols by an ethics committee is required for all research studies according to international agreements ("WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (last updated October 2013, Fortaleza, Brazil)", "Guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals (8th edition, 2011)" and/or "International Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (2012)). If the manuscript does not include ethics committee approval, it will be reviewed according to the COPE (Editor's Guide to Research, Audit and Service Evaluations) guidelines. If the study requires ethical approval, the authors will be asked to provide ethical approval. If they fail to provide ethical approval, their manuscript will be rejected and the relevant institutions and, if necessary, the relevant organizations in their countries will be notified that such studies require ethics committee approval. If, after review by the Editorial Board, it is decided that the study does not require ethics committee approval, the authors will be asked to provide ethics committee approval or a document issued by an independent committee stating that the study does not require ethics committee approval in accordance with the code of integrity applicable in their country. If the authors provide either ethics committee approval or a document indicating that approval is not required, the review process will continue. If the authors cannot provide either document, the manuscript will be rejected. For articles on experimental research on humans, a statement indicating that informed consent has been obtained from patients and volunteers should be included after the procedures they may undergo are explained in detail.
Informed consent is also required for case reports. All recognizable photographs of the patient and written permission from the patient for reproduction must be declared. All procedures performed to relieve any pain, harm, and distress in the subjects/animals should be clearly stated. Authors should clearly state that they comply with internationally recognized guidelines and guidelines published by the relevant authority of their country. The journal requires a copy of the Ethics Committee Approval from the relevant authority.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal requires reviewers to act confidently when evaluating articles. The content of the review should not be used or shared in any way until publication. In case of possible reviewer misconduct, the Güven Journal of Medicine and Health Sciences applies the COPE flowchart. For the COPE ethical guidelines that reviewers are expected to follow, please refer to the documents titled "Basic principles that reviewers are expected to follow" and "Expectations from reviewers".
Our reviewers are expected to check that manuscripts comply with SAGER guidelines and to encourage authors to do so. Authors should use the terms gender (biological trait) and sexual identity (shaped by social and cultural conditions) with care to avoid confusing the two terms. Article titles and/or abstracts should indicate which gender(s) the study applies to. Authors should also explain in the background whether gender and/or sexual identity differences can be expected. They should report how gender and/or gender identity was accounted for in the design of the study and, where appropriate, provide sex- and/or gender-identity-disaggregated data and discuss relevant results. If gender and/or sexual identity analysis was not performed, the rationale should be given in the discussion.
Guven Medical and Health Sciences journal uses bibliographic databases to find new reviewers and also accepts suggestions from authors. As our journal, we would like to thank our referees and would like to state that we publish the referee list in the last issue of each year. In addition, if the referees request, the referee certificate is provided by the editors.
In addition to the routine questions provided on the reviewer comment page, reviewers may also use the following questions when reviewing their review:
1. Please indicate whether you have any conflict(s) of interest in reviewing this review.
2. Do you suspect any research or publication irregularities?
3. Does the review contain important information for publication?
4. Is the title of the review appropriate?
5. Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
6. Is the topic of the review stated in a meaningful and concise way?
7. Is the conclusion clear and satisfactory?
8. Are interpretations and conclusions justified by the results?
9. Are adequate and up-to-date references provided?
10. Is the terminology used in the text appropriate for medical writing?
11. Are figure/table explanations adequate?
12. Is it necessary to shorten/extend the review?