Peer Review Process

Definition of Peer Review

Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. Two most important modes of Peer Review are Single Blind Peer Review and Double Blind Peer Review.

 


 

Kowsar Review Policy

All submitted manuscripts are subjected to the peer review and editorial approval. Articles will be sent to at least three reviewers. Sometimes, the reviewers are masked to the identity of the authors and their affiliations. Authors are usually notified within 1-2 months about the acceptability of their manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise within the topic area of the submission, and their purpose is to assist the authors and the journal by providing a critical review of the manuscript. After receiving the reviewers’ comments, authors are requested to send the revised article, and a copy of their reply to the reviewers including the comment and explaining the replies to the questions and the changes made to the revised version. The communication regarding a specific manuscript will be done only between the journal and the designated corresponding author.

Every reviewer's comments will be read and reviewed by associated editor and afterwards send to the EIC for final decision. Peer reviewers have 2 types: 

1) Selected by EIC  

2) Introduced by Authors during submission: For the second type, EIC will review and approve/decline them.

 

We, as the publisher, will check primarily about these items:

- Plagiarism with iThenticate

- File control (correct word file, figure, etc)

- Word count limitations

- English Writing

If we see a problem/error in this starting point, then we return the manuscript for more consideration to EIC and if EIC decided to return it to author, s/he returns it him/herself.


 

Complete resource of peer review policy in our company is stated here: Peer Review Process

But in brief: After submitting a manuscript by an author, we screen it for any similarity and lack of correct file(s) and other standards like English writing. Then we assign a fault free manuscript to our editor in chiefs. EICs send this manuscript to a specific associate editor and each associate editor invites 2 or 3 reviewers. Reviewers can submit their comments as "Public" and/or "Private" comments. Finally, EIC will review and send final decision to Author.

Author Submits a manuscript >> Publisher screens the manuscript >> EIC assign it to Associate Editor(AE) >>> AE invite reviewers >>> Then final decision will be sent to Author.

 

 


How to do review in Kowsar Journals?

To download the instruction file in PDF click HERE

 

 


 

 

Reviewers Guidelines

To improve success rate of publishing articles, authors can have a look at these checklists which will be considered as a checklist by Reviewers in the review process.

Title

Description

Download

GENERAL

Checklist for all types of studies

Download Word File

STROBE

Checklist of items that should be included in reports of cross-sectional studies 
Read More...

Download Word File

STROBE

Checklist of items that should be included in reports of case-control studies
Read More...

Download Word File

STROBE

Checklist of items that should be included in reports of cohort studies
Read More...

Download Word File

STROBE

Checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies
Read More...

Download Word File

CONSORT

Checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial
Read More...

Download Word File

PRISMA

Transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Read More...

Download Word File

STARD

Checklist for reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy
Read More...

Download Word File

TREND

Non-randomised evaluations of behavioural and public health interventions
Read More...

Download Word File

REMARK

Checklist for Tumour marker prognostic studies
Read More...

Download Word File

COREQ

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research: a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups
Read More...

Download Word File