Instructions for Reviewers

Manuscripts submitted to Journal of Clinical Practice and Research will go through a double-blind peer-review process. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in their fields in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. The editorial board will invite an external and independent editor to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or by the editorial board members of the journal. The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.The language of the journal is English.

Reviewers who seek assistance from a trainee or colleague in the performance of a review should acknowledge these individuals' contributions in the written comments submitted to the editor. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript, which may prohibit the uploading of the manuscript to software or other AI technologies where confidentiality cannot be assured. Reviewers must request permission from the journal prior to using AI technology to facilitate their review.

All articles submitted for publication are strictly reviewed by the reviewersfor their;

originality,
methodology,
importance,
quality,
ethical nature and,
suitability for the journal

The Journal of Clinical Practice and Research uses a well-constructed scheme for the evaluation process. The journal peer review flow chart is seen as below (for more information, please read to "Instructions to Author"). The reviewers should consider below points for the evaluation of papers;

1.      Does the manuscript contain new and significant information to justify publication?

2.      Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?

3.      Is the topicsignificant and concisely stated?

4.      Are the methods described comprehensively?

5.      Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by the results?

6.      Are adequate and up-to-date references used in the article?

7.      Is the length of the article appropriate?

8.      Are the numbers of table/ figure adequate?

9.      Is the language acceptable?

10.  Is the manuscript prepared in according with the journal’s guidelines?

11.  Please rate the priority for publishing this article (10 is the highest priority. 1 is the lowest priority?)

Editorial Board of the Journal of Clinical Practice and Research encourages reviewers to comment on possible research or publication misconduct such as unethical research design, duplication, plagiarism, etc. Plagiarism is a serious problem and the most common ethical issue afflicting medical writing. The Journal of Clinical Practice and Research does not allow any form of plagiarism. In accordance with our journal policy, submitted manuscripts are screened with plagiarism software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text (iThenticate and others) at least two times (during the evaluation process and after acceptance). If the reviewers have any suspect, the editors can provide them information obtained by plagiarism screening tools.

The Journal of Clinical Practice and Research wants reviewers to treat the manuscripts in confidence. The material of the manuscripts must not be used or shared in any way until they have been published.

The journal thanks to the reviewers and publishes the reviewer list every year in the last issue and on the website after each issue.