ISMJ

Peer Review Policy

Editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, and we do not always follow the majority recommendation. We try to evaluate the strength of the arguments raised by each reviewer and by the authors, and we may also consider other information not available to either party. Our primary responsibilities are to our readers and to the scientific community at large, and in deciding how best to serve them, we must weigh the claims of each paper against the many others also under consideration. Reviewers are welcome to recommend a particular course of action, but they should bear in mind that the other reviewers of a particular paper may have different technical expertise and/or views, and the editors may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice. The most useful reports, therefore, provide the editors with the information on which a decision should be based. Setting out the arguments for and against publication is often more helpful to the editors than a direct recommendation one way or the other. Double blind peer review Iranian South Medical Journal offers a double-blind peer review option. Neither the peer reviewers nor the authors are revealed to each other. Authors may suggest preferred and non-preferred reviewers during manuscript submission. However, the ultimate selection of the reviewers will be determined by the editor(s). We ask reviewers not to identify themselves to authors while the manuscript is under consideration without the editor's knowledge. If this is not practicable, we ask authors to inform the editor as soon as possible after a reviewer has revealed his or her identity to the author. Peer review process The peer-review process is the main mechanism for ensuring the quality of published articles. To this end, the submitted articles are rigorously peer-reviewed to ensure the high quality submissions are accepted and published. The decision to accept a manuscript is not based solely on the scientific validity and originality of the study content; other factors are considered, including the level of innovation, extent and importance of new information in the paper as compared with that in other papers being considered, the Journal's need to represent a wide range of topics, and the overall suitability for Journal. Peer review process is follow as below mention steps: At first, editor(s) acts as a first filter by evaluating each manuscript for novelty, interest for our readers and chances to compete in peer review. Yet the process avoids futile cycles of review for manuscripts that are better suited for a more specialized journal, saving time for authors and reviewers. Modifications/corrections may be requested from the authors at this stage before starting the peer review. In the second step, editors select typically two reviewers, experts in the topic. Often, we also include one expert for statistics or a particular technique. peer reviewers will make suggestions to the editor(s). The authors can monitor the progress of the manuscript throughout the review process in his/her profile. Submitted manuscripts will be rendered one of the following decisions: Accept Submissin: The submission will be accepted without revisions. Revisions Requierd: The submission will be accepted after minor changes have been made. Resubmit for Review: The submission needs to be re-worked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. It will require a second round of review, however. Decline Submission: The submission will not be published with the journal. If the author(s) believe that the journal has rejected their article in error, perhaps because the reviewers have misunderstood its scientific content, an appeal may be submitted by e-mail to the editorial office (journal's email). However, appeals are ineffective in most cases and are discouraged. Editing referees' reports As a matter of policy, we do not suppress reviewers' reports; any comments that were intended for the authors are transmitted, regardless of what we may think of the content. On rare occasions, we may edit a report to remove offensive language or comments that reveal confidential information about other matters. We ask reviewers to avoid statements that may cause needless offence; conversely, we strongly encourage reviewers to state plainly their opinion of a paper. Timing Iranian South Medical Journal is committed to rapid editorial decisions and publication, and we believe that an efficient editorial process is a valuable service both to our authors and to the scientific community as a whole. We therefore ask reviewers to respond promptly within the number of days agreed. If reviewers anticipate a longer delay than previously expected, we ask them to let us know so that we can keep the authors informed and, where necessary, find alternatives.

Peer Review Process

A submission code will be allocated and all the future contacts should be based on this given code. Then articles are primarily evaluated by our statisticians and internal screeners who check the articles to see if the format and content conforms to the journal's criteria and then if acceptable is sent for peer-reviewing and for any methodological flaws, format, and their compliance with the journal’s instructions. Journal follows a Double-Blind peer review in which the authors do not know the reviewers and vice versa.  The articles will then be reviewed by at least three external (peer) reviewers. Their Comments will be passed to the authors and their responses to the comments along with the reviewer’s comments will then be evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief, the Deputy Editor, and a final reviewer who can be a member of the Editorial Board. The final review process will be discussed in regular session and on the basis of their comments, and the journal’s Scope the Editor-in-Chief will decide which articles should be published. 

Manuscript Peer Review Steps

Manuscript submission by the author includes the complete registration of authors and manuscript in the webpage of the journal. Before sending the manuscript in order to expedite the process, please review the stages including the authors’ guide carefully and accurately set based on the guideline in the system and then submit your paper.

1. The editor and the editorial board opinion about the article and, if necessary, referral to specialized secretary
2. Presentation to 3 peer reviewers; all editorial processes are double-blind and assessed by 3 reviewers and also a statistical reviewer
3. Reviewers opportunity to review manuscripts and comments with complete evaluation forms and proceed to the editor and the authors on the quality and quantity of manuscript
4. Resubmission of the manuscripts by the authors
5. Sending of the manuscript to former reviewers for re-evaluation
6. Make the final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript
7. In case of rejection of the manuscript the author will be informed; the accepted ones are proceed to the next stage
8. The manuscripts will be sent to the Persian and English editing
9. The manuscripts will be sent to layout
10. The waiting period depends on the number of accepted manuscripts which are in press
11. Finally, after publishing an article, it can be downloaded in a PDF file for free on the journal's website.

Please pay attention:

• After notification to the corresponding author, the authors will have a deadline to submit the initial revision and also two days for final approval of the manuscript. Obviously the author's lack of response as an approval of this article is available on site.
• Editorial board has a right to accepting, rejecting and also has a right  to do scientific and literary editing of an article, shorten it (subject to agreement by the author).
• The corresponding author is responsible for the contents of their articles and all rights reserved for the authors.

  The articles decision making process in Iranian South Medical Journal