Peer Review Process

The Diyala Journal for Veterinary Sciences (DJVS) employs a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the entire process to ensure fairness, credibility, and reliability.

All manuscripts must be submitted through the online manuscript management system of the journal. Authors are required to create an account prior to submission. The review process proceeds as follows:

1. Submission of Manuscript

The corresponding (or submitting) author uploads the manuscript through the online submission system of the DJVS.

2. Initial Check

The Editorial Director reviews the submission for compliance with the formatting, structure, and completeness requirements of the journal. No assessment of the scientific content is conducted at this stage.

3. Editor-in-Chief Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript to determine whether it falls within the scope of the journal and offers original, relevant content. Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria are respectfully declined before entering peer review process.

4. Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts are screened for originality using Turnitin plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 20% will be rejected.

5. Reviewer Selection

The Editor-in-Chief assigns two to three qualified reviewers with expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. Additional reviewers may be invited when necessary.

6. Reviewer Invitation Response

Invited reviewers assess the suitability of the review request, considering potential conflicts of interest, availability, and alignment of expertise. They may accept or decline the invitation accordingly.

7. Peer Review

Accepted reviewers conduct a thorough evaluation of the manuscript, assessing its scientific rigor, originality, clarity, and contribution to the field. They provide a recommendation:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Reviewers provide an anonymous, constructively critical report to assist authors in improving their work.

8. Language Review

In parallel with the scientific review, the manuscript is sent to a Language Editor to assess:

  • Grammar, spelling, and clarity of expression
  • Academic writing style
  • Consistency in terminology and presentation

Recommendations may be made for language refinement before or after scientific revisions.

9. Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief reviews the comments and recommendations of all reviewers, and in cases of substantial changes to the manuscript, a third reviewer may be consulted before making the final decision.

10. Author Notification

The corresponding author is informed of the preliminary decision and receives anonymized reviewer comments.

11. Manuscript Revision

If revisions are requested, the author must address all comments of the reviewers and highlight changes in the revised manuscript (e.g., using truck changes, red text or highlighted background).

12. Final Decision and Publication

Once the revised manuscript is accepted, the author is required to pay the Article Processing Charge. The manuscript then undergoes copyediting, formatting, and final preparation before publication.

 

Submission to accptance steps