Instructions to Reviewers
Turkish Journal of Surgery : Guidelines for the reviewers
- All submissions to Turkish Journal of Surgery (TJS) are subject to double blind peer review by selected experts. The aim of the peer review is to improve the quality of the manuscript that is eventually published. Therefore, detailed, unbiased and evidence-based comments are essential for fair decisions to accept, revise or reject the submissions.
- Experts are expected to review the manuscripts in terms of clarity, originality and contribution to science. They are also required to check the format of the article besides accuracy and up-to-dateness of the references.
- We are expecting comments on all aspects related to research and publication ethics. Please be careful not to criticize the scientist but the science and avoid personal criticism of the author.
- At the beginning of the review process, the editorial team of TJS select and assign at least two reviewers. As soon as the comments and suggestions are received, the editorial team make the decision in the light of the reviewers’ comments as well as the inner assessment for the suitability of the submission for an eventual publication. A brief presentation of the review process is shown below in the flowchart.
Privacy of the review and study:
- TJS pay a great attention to the privacy of the review process and perform a double-blind review. We expect from the reviewers to respect the privacy of the studies and not to reproduce these scientific ideas in the future in any form (similar hypothesis or study form etc.) in order to avoid any misunderstanding and ethical issues.
- TJS publishes all articles and case reports in the field of general surgery and associated disciplines, if the topic of the study is closely related to general surgery.
- Submissions from disciplines such as intensive care, endoscopy, pain management etc. are being reviewed for possible publication in TJS . However, manuscripts that are out of this scope of TJS (for example a study on the surgical treatment of lung cancer or spine surgery etc.) are not considered for a review.
Publication priorities of TJS
- TJS has some preferences in terms of the topics and type of the studies, like many other prominent scientific journals. As a quarterly published journal, we have limited pages and therefore, we may only publish some finely selected articles. Furthermore, we have very limited space for case reports. It is shown below in the Table the priorities of TJS regarding article types.
Table: Priorities in the Turkish Journal of Surgery regarding submission types
|Type of the manuscript||Priority||Definition|
|Original research article||high||These articles (clinical studies, experimental studies, meta - analyses etc.) have the greatest priority for TJS|
|Review articles||upon invitation||Reviews are being published upon invitation from the editorial team to the world-known experts in the field, on a defined schedule|
|Case reports||low||Case reports (CR) have limited priority for TJS. There are only limited pages available for this type of article and the publication queue for the accepted CR is unfortunately long|
|Technical report||low||Similar to CR, there is imited space in TJS for original technical reports|
|Letter to the editor||low||Letter to the editors (LTE) are not wholly published in the journal. They appear in the issues in a separate page only with the title and the authors’ names etc. The full text is being published online in the Journal’s official web site.|
Ethical policy of the journal:
- The editorial team of Turkish Journal of Surgery pay a special attention to ethical issues. The journal follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. As our Journal's policy (and like many prominent journals), we do request an ethical committee approval from all clinical (prospective and retrospective) and experimental studies. It is not seldom that the authors perform their retrospective clinical studies without an ethical approval. TJS request, without an exception, the ethical approval also from retrospective studies.
We find this approval absolutely mandatory because:
- the issues of a retrospective study may be controversial and would be subject to an ethical assessment
- the authors may not have the right to collect data from the institution, which is also an important problem regarding the study
Both of these issues may lead to serious ethical concerns after the publication of a retrospective study, and the editors cannot judge it for each submission.
We do expect from the reviewers to be sensible for all ethical issues and report us immediately if they realize any proven or controversial ethical problem.
Accepting or declining reviewer invitations
- All article types will be sent to at least two peer reviewers. TJS uses double-blind peer review, meaning that the identities of both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other.
- TJS sends an email to selected reviewers through the online submission system and invites to review the manuscript. At this point, the reviewer can accept or reject the review invitation. When the invited experts feel busy or consider the topic of the submission out of their expertise, they are requested to decline the invitation.
- If we are not able to receive any reply from the invited experts within a defined period of time, we take back the invitation and assign another reviewer for this submission. Your prompt response in regards of the acceptance or denial of the invitation is critical to achieve a quick review process.
Conflict of interest
- Reviewers should decline to review a submission when they have any financial or nonfinancial conflicts of interest that may prejudice their professional comments and recommendations.
- Reviewers may also comment on authors’ declared conflicts of interest. If there are concerns that authors have not fully disclosed financial, institutional, commercial, personal, ideological, or academic interests, this should be mentioned in the reviewer report. If in doubt, please contact the editor requesting the review before accepting it.
- Reviewers are expected to submit their comments within 14 days of accepting the invitation.
- We kindly ask you to submit your peer review comments through the online editorial system of TJS. Please do not send your comments by e-mail. If you are foreseeing a need for an additional time, please contact the editorial office.
Technical tips about methodology and statistics of the study:
TJS expects the review of the study especially regarding the following points:
- The aim of the study should be clearly defined in the introduction section.
- The study should have an appropriate methodology designed to answer the questions stated in the introduction section.
- For the reproducibility of the study, all definitions, materials and methods used in the study should be defined.
- Ethical approvals and required permissions should be obtained and specified in the methods section.
- An appropriate statistical approach in line with the aim of the study should be selected, and the statistical methods/software used in the study should be presented under the "statistical analysis" subtitle.
- The person who contributed to the statistical analysis of the study should be stated in the "authors contribution" or "acknowledgments" section.
- While writing the conclusion, the level of evidence of the study should be taken into consideration.
- The conclusion of the study should be in line with the aim and supported by the findings.
How to write your review to the authors?
We kindly ask to compose your review letter to the authors considering the following points:
- Please do not list any final recommendation about the suitability for a publication in the comments conveyed to authors.
- Reviewers are expected to provide effective and accurate scientific communication with constructive, clear and positive comments. The comments should be detailed and helpful for the authors in order to improve their manuscript.
- Polite and appropriate language should be used during the review process. The journal’s aim is to contribute to the literature and will be thankful for their valuable support.
Communication with the editors
- Reviewers will send their comments to the editorial team. Any concerns about the manuscript and/or the reviewer’s professional interest in the field can be sent to the editor confidentially.
- Revisions: During the review process, the editor may ask the reviewer to revise once again the revised form of the manuscript.
- Final Decision: The editorial team make the final decision according to the reviewer comments, suggestions and the inner assessment of the journal. The final decision on the review process is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
Koru Mah. Koru Sitesi, Ihlamur Cad. No: 26
06810 Çayyolu, Ankara, Türkiye
Phone: +90 (312) 241 99 90
Fax: +90 (312) 241 99 91
|SCImago Journal Rank||0.250||0.216||0.180|
|CiteScore Rank (Scopus)||#273/420||#279/422||#291/469|
|Journal Citation Indicator (Clarivate)||227/270 (Q4)||234/271 (Q4)||227/279 (Q4)|