Reviewer Responsibilities

The Diyala Journal for Veterinary Sciences (DJVS) is a double-blind, open-access, peer-reviewed journal that relies on the expertise, diligence, and integrity of its reviewers to uphold the quality, credibility, reliability, and ethical standards of its published articles. As part of the double-blind peer review process of the journal, both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other to ensure impartial and unbiased evaluation.

Reviewers are expected to fulfill the following responsibilities when assessing manuscripts submitted to DJVS:

  1. Confidentiality
  • All manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential documents.
  • Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose any part of the manuscript with third parties without prior permission from the editorial office.
  • Information obtained through the peer review process must not be used for personal, professional, or competitive advantage.
  1. Objectivity and Impartiality
  • Reviews must be conducted objectively and free from personal, professional, or academic bias.
  • Criticism should be constructive, clear, and supported by sound reasoning or evidence.
  • Reviewers should decline to assess a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest with any of the authors, their institutions, or the funding bodies associated with the research.
  1. Timeliness
  • Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the agreed time frame upon accepting the review invitation.
  • If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, they must promptly notify the editorial office so that alternative arrangements can be made.
  1. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should alert the editorial office to any suspected ethical issues, including:

  • Potential plagiarism.
  • Data manipulation.
  • Ethical concerns in animal or human subjects.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest by the authors.
  1. Quality and Academic Rigor

Reviewers should evaluate:

  • The originality and significance of the research.
  • The clarity of objectives and methodology.
  • The accuracy and relevance of data analysis and interpretation.
  • Whether the conclusions are valid and supported by the findings.
  • The adequacy, accuracy, and relevance of references.
  1. Constructive Feedback Report
  • Provide detailed, clear, and actionable comments aimed at improving the manuscript.
  • Avoid vague, unsubstantiated, or personal remarks.
  • Suggestions for improvement should be supported by evidence or relevant literature where possible.
  1. Adherence to Journal Scope
  • Reviewers should ensure that the manuscript aligns with the aims and scope of DJVS, which covers basic, clinical, and public health veterinary sciences, zoonotic diseases, and related interdisciplinary fields.
  1. Double-Blind Integrity
  • Reviewers must refrain from attempting to identify the authors.
  • Any suspicion regarding author identity should be reported confidentially to the editorial office and must not be included in the review report.

Commitment to Ethical Reviewing

By accepting an invitation to review for DJVS, reviewers affirm their commitment to these responsibilities and to upholding the highest standards of integrity, objectivity, and ethical conduct in scholarly publishing.