Peer review process
All research articles, and most other article types, published by the journals of Zabol University of Medical Sciences undergo a thorough peer review process. This usually involves review by two independent peer reviewers. Individual journals may differ in their peer review processes. For an individual journal’s peer review policy, please see the journal website.
Peer review policy
All submissions to journals published by Zabol University of Medical Sciences are assessed by an editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Where an editor is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific submission, another member of the editorial board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by appropriate independent experts. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected.
All journals published by Zabol University of Medical Sciences operate a closed double-blind peer review process. The authors and the reviewers will be treated anonymously.
Authors may suggest potential reviewers if they wish; however, decision to consider these reviewers is at the editor's discretion. Authors should not suggest recent collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves. Authors who wish to suggest peer reviewers can do so in the cover letter and should provide institutional email addresses where possible or information which will help the Editor to verify and identity the potential introduced reviewer (for example an ORCID or Scopus ID).
Authors may request exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the editor may choose to invite excluded peer reviewers.
Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in rejection of the manuscript and may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy.