Reviewer Guideline

Overview: Articles submitted to the journal undergo multiple pre-control evaluations, including compliance with journal writing rules, spelling and writing errors, statistical and language evaluation, and plagiarism screening. After this stage, articles proceed to a "Double-Blind Referee Review."

Review Process:

  1. Assignment: Each article is sent to 2 referees.
  2. Decision:
    • If both referees accept the article, it is accepted for publication.
    • If both referees reject the article, it is rejected.
    • If one referee accepts and the other rejects, the article is sent to a third referee whose decision determines the outcome.
  3. Timeline: The entire review process aims to be completed within 3 months, preferably within 1 month. Quick responses after revision are essential.

Article Evaluation Form:

  • Double-Blind Policy: Referee information is not shared with the author. Comments and suggestions should be made anonymously.
  • Software Compatibility: The Article Evaluation Form is not accessible via Internet Explorer or Microsoft Edge. Use search engines like Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.
  • Submission: Use the "Word Description/Add Comment" feature for suggestions/questions. Send system messages for editor-only points.
  • Suggestions: Choose Accept, Reject, Major Revision, or Minor Revision. For revisions, re-evaluation will be requested upon submission of the corrected version by the author.

Ethical Policies for Reviewers:

Conflict of Interest Statement:

  • If any conflict of interest is identified during the review, inform the editor immediately to reassign the article to another reviewer.

Double-Blind Status:

  • The identities of referees and authors remain confidential.
  • Do not include your name in the evaluation.
  • Do not contact the author directly.
  • If the manuscript is not properly blinded, inform the editorial board and refrain from reviewing until proper blinding is ensured.

Confidentiality Policy:

  • Maintain confidentiality regarding the article’s existence and content.
  • Do not share or discuss the article with others before it is printed.
  • If colleague assistance is needed, inform the editor and ensure the colleague also maintains confidentiality.

Reviewer Conduct:

  • Adhere to the 'ICMJE Uniform Requirements.'
  • Do not use information from the manuscript for personal benefit prior to publication.

Reporting Ethical Concerns:

  • Report any suspected cheating, fraud, plagiarism, or ethical concerns regarding human or animal research to the editor.

Handling Suspected Fraud:

  • If you suspect that the findings in an article are incorrect or fraudulent, contact the editor immediately to investigate further.

Writing the Review Conclusion:

  • Address your comments, suggestions, and opinions regarding the manuscript. This feedback is crucial for the authors to improve their work and for the editorial process.
  • Ensure your review is thorough, objective, and constructive, adhering to the highest standards of academic integrity.

By following these guidelines, you help maintain the quality and integrity of the journal's peer review process, ultimately contributing to the advancement of scientific knowledge in the field of endocrine tests. Thank you for your invaluable contribution as a reviewer.