AIM
Journal of Eurasian Medical Science is an accessible scientific journal that aims to publish original contributions from different scientific disciplines in every field of medicine.
Thanks to the advisory board covering a wide variety of medical specialties, publishing original contributions from different scientific disciplines in every medical field becomes possible.
By preferring open access, making the published studies open to the public freely, increasing the global sharing of information, adopting Open Access Policy, and allowing free access to all content without paying any users or institutions, we aim to share the work freely by non-exclusive distribution (for example, by adding it to an institutional information pool or publishing it in a book), on condition that it is stated that the study is published in our journal for the first time.
SCOPE
Not only they are limited to the following content, but their interests and topics are:
• First Aid and Emergency Medicine
• Family Practice
• Public Health and Preventive Medicine
• Internal Diseases
• General Surgery
• Gynecology and Obstetrics
• Ear Nose Throat Diseases
• Eye Diseases
• Orthopedics and Traumatology Diseases
• Radiology and Radiodiagnosis
• Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine
• Adolescent Diseases
• Childhood Diseases
• Multisystem Diseases
• Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• Medical Jurisprudence and Forensic Sciences
• Psychiatry
• Cardiovascular Diseases
• Nervous System Diseases
• Brain and Nerve Surgery
• Respiratory System Diseases
• Infectious Diseases
• Occupational Diseases
• Nuclear Medicine
• Oncological Diseases
• Sports Medicine
• Genetic Diseases
• Medical Pathology
• Medical Education
• History of Medicine, Medical Jurisprudence and Medical Ethics
The pursuit of our journal is not only the disciplines mentioned above but also all relevant internal and surgical specialties; it also covers all basic medical disciplines.
Originality of Manuscript
The corresponding author must attest that their work is unique, has never been published before, and is not currently being considered for publication by another journal.
In the Article Submission Form, the relevant author must attest to the work's originality.
If the work has previously been presented as an oral or poster presentation at a meeting, the corresponding author must include the name, date, and location of the meeting on the Title Page.
Human Rights
The Journal of Erasian Medical Science accepts the Declaration of Helsinki Principles as the policy of the Journal. Therefore, all studies concerning human subjects must be approved by the Institutional Review Board. All study subjects should be informed and written consent should be obtained. The editor may ask for a copy of the approval document.
Animal Rights
All studies dealing with animal subjects must be performed according to The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/5140/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals) with the approval of the Institutional Review Board. The editor may ask for a copy of the approval document.
Editorial and Peer Review Process
Pre-evaluation
All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal's online system at http://jeurmeds.com to be received consideration. The entire publication process of the journal is carried out through the online submission system. Thus, any objection can be documented.
Whether or not the articles are suitable for publication in the journal is decided based on the editorial board's editorial policy
The Editor-in-Chief is fully authorized in the evaluation process carried out in the order of submission to the journal.
The Editor-in-Chief or one of the associate editors is appointed to make the first evaluation of the submitted articles. Then, the assigned editor conducts a pre-evaluation on whether the article is readable, complete, correctly formatted, original, within the journal's focus and scope, in the style of a scientific article, and in an understandable language.
Plagiarism Control
The journal is a member of Crosscheck, and all manuscripts are scanned for originality through Crosscheck. In case serious problems are detected in the article, the responsible author is informed by the editor in charge as a standard practice. If you are not contacted for quite serious problems, you do not need to take any action.
By regarding the criteria mentioned above, articles containing problems can be rejected at this step. The reason why they are rejected is to be outside of the journal's focus and scope. If the articles pass this step, they are taken into the peer-review process.
In the journal, a double-blind evaluation method is used. Therefore, authors should divide the manuscript into the following parts before submitting the draft:
A blunted main text file with no authors' names and positions (Citations or sources that reveal the identity of the authors should not be included in the text).
A separate full text containing all parts of the article including the title, names of all authors, places of duty, and contact information of the responsible author; Turkish and English title, Turkish and English abstract, introduction, method, findings, case report, discussion, and conclusion; acknowledgments and references file. Acknowledgment, waiver, or funding information should be stated on this page. The journal's associate editors facilitate the peer-review process by helping to blind the manuscript and contacting potential advisors from the appropriate field of expertise.
The journal employs a strict double-blind evaluation method to ensure best practice in academic research and publishing. In the double-blind evaluation, the authors do not know who the advisors are, and the authors do not know by whom their articles are reviewed. To ensure this confidentiality in the double-blind evaluation process, the names of the authors should not be included in the article. Therefore, when using the Microsoft Word program, existing credentials in the Summary section in File -> Properties -> Summary menu should be removed. After being blinded, the editor in charge chooses two members of the relevant field of expertise from the advisory board, and the article is shared with the advisors for double-blind peer-review. Throughout this whole process, advisors and authors do not have information about each other's identities.
The advisor is chosen from people who do not work at the same institution as the author. After being appointed, the advisors are sent an invitation letter to participate in the evaluation process. This e-mail invitation sent to the advisors includes all necessary information about the article. Advisors are asked to log in to the journal's website to indicate whether they can review or not. After this, they can access the post and save their opinions and suggestions. If there is no response given to the invitation within 7 days, an automatic reminder letter is sent to the advisor. The usual time allowed for evaluation is around 4 weeks, but some changes can be during this time in the publication process.
Peer-Reviews
The following types of suggestions can be made to the editorial board by the advisors: acceptance of the post, revision required, re-evaluation after correction, re-posting, rejection of the submission. Besides, advisors are asked to make beneficial suggestions for the authors. They are also asked to record their advice in the space allocated only for the editors. Advisors are not required to check the typesetting; there is no expectation in this direction. If both advisors agree to accept or reject the article, the decision is made automatically. Sometimes the recommendations of the advisors can be opposite to each other. Then, the review of a third advisor is sought, which delays the process a little. If the advisors' views are too far from each other, the editor in charge can apply the next step to decide whether to accept or reject the article. In this step, the responsible editor can request an urgent evaluation from someone else on the advisory board. In the articles that the time allocated to the consultants for the evaluation process has expired, the responsible editor may request an evaluation from other advisors by performing additional procedures. If the article is not found suitable for publication, it is sent back to the author with a letter explaining the reasons why the article is rejected. If the author thinks that there is an incorrect or dishonest evaluation, there is a right of objection. If a letter explaining why the decision should be reconsidered is sent to the editor-in-chief, the decision will be reviewed. After completing each round of the peer-review process, the editor responsible for making the necessary corrections according to the advisors' recommendations informs the authors by an official letter. When the authors make the necessary corrections on the article following the advisors' recommendations, the authors should send a list of these changes and their answers to the advisors. Authors should upload the revised manuscript to the online system within four weeks; otherwise, the author will be informed that the manuscript has been considered withdrawn. The revised version of the manuscript is usually re-submitted to at least one of the advisors in the first round and consulted whether the changes made are satisfactory. If the advisors are not satisfied with the changes, the letter can be re-referred to the advisory board for further evaluation. After this, the editor in charge checks whether or not the necessary corrections have been made in the article in line with the advisory board's suggestions and proceeds to the next step. If the responsible editor finds the corrections satisfactory, she/he saves her/his decision to end the evaluation process, and the final decision is made.
Decision-making Process
Editors are responsible for deciding on the acceptance or rejection of an article in line with two or more advisors' suggestions. Also, they are responsible for forwarding this decision to the author. By following the completion of each round of the peer-review process, a formal letter is sent to the author by the responsible editor, including the advisor's recommendations. Editor-in-Chief usually completes the process within two months from the article's submission until the final decision is made. Authors are informed by e-mail whether a manuscript is accepted for publication or not. Print drafts of accepted manuscripts are usually sent to authors for correction within the next four weeks. Authors should carefully review the submitted manuscript following the attached suggestions and return it within the appropriate time after making necessary corrections.
TARGET AUDIENCE
The target audience of the journal is academicians in internal and surgical medicine, specialist physicians and research assistants, general practitioners, academicians in basic medical sciences, experts and research assistants, dentists, and nurses.
PUBLICATION FREQUENCY
Journal of Eurasian Medical Science is published in 3 issues per year in print and online. The official language of the journal is both Turkish and English.
EVALUATION PROCESS
Pre-evaluation
All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal's online system at http://jeurmeds.com to be received consideration. The entire publication process of the journal is carried out through the online submission system. Thus, any objection can be documented.
Whether or not the articles are suitable for publication in the journal is decided based on the editorial board's editorial policy.
The Editor-in-Chief is fully authorized in the evaluation process carried out in the order of submission to the journal.
The Editor-in-Chief or one of the associate editors is appointed to make the first evaluation of the submitted articles. Then, the assigned editor conducts a pre-evaluation on whether the article is readable, complete, correctly formatted, original, within the journal's focus and scope, in the style of a scientific article, and in an understandable language.
Plagiarism Control
The journal is a member of Crosscheck, and all manuscripts are scanned for originality through Crosscheck. In case serious problems are detected in the article, the responsible author is informed by the editor in charge as a standard practice. If you are not contacted for quite serious problems, you do not need to take any action.
By regarding the criteria mentioned above, articles containing problems can be rejected at this step. The reason why they are rejected is to be outside of the journal's focus and scope. If the articles pass this step, they are taken into the peer-review process.
In the journal, a double-blind evaluation method is used. Therefore, authors should divide the manuscript into the following parts before submitting the draft:
A blunted main text file with no authors' names and positions (Citations or sources that reveal the identity of the authors should not be included in the text).
A separate full text containing all parts of the article including the title, names of all authors, places of duty, and contact information of the responsible author; Turkish and English title, Turkish and English abstract, introduction, method, findings, case report, discussion, and conclusion; acknowledgments and references file. Acknowledgment, waiver, or funding information should be stated on this page. The journal's associate editors facilitate the peer-review process by helping to blind the manuscript and contacting potential advisors from the appropriate field of expertise.
The journal employs a strict double-blind evaluation method to ensure best practice in academic research and publishing. In the double-blind evaluation, the authors do not know who the advisors are, and the authors do not know by whom their articles are reviewed. To ensure this confidentiality in the double-blind evaluation process, the names of the authors should not be included in the article. Therefore, when using the Microsoft Word program, existing credentials in the Summary section in File -> Properties -> Summary menu should be removed. After being blinded, the editor in charge chooses two members of the relevant field of expertise from the advisory board, and the article is shared with the advisors for double-blind peer-review. Throughout this whole process, advisors and authors do not have information about each other's identities.
The advisor is chosen from people who do not work at the same institution as the author. After being appointed, the advisors are sent an invitation letter to participate in the evaluation process. This e-mail invitation sent to the advisors includes all necessary information about the article. Advisors are asked to log in to the journal's website to indicate whether they can review or not. After this, they can access the post and save their opinions and suggestions. If there is no response given to the invitation within 7 days, an automatic reminder letter is sent to the advisor. The usual time allowed for evaluation is around 4 weeks, but some changes can be during this time in the publication process.
Peer-Reviews
The following types of suggestions can be made to the editorial board by the advisors: acceptance of the post, revision required, re-evaluation after correction, re-posting, rejection of the submission. Besides, advisors are asked to make beneficial suggestions for the authors. They are also asked to record their advice in the space allocated only for the editors. Advisors are not required to check the typesetting; there is no expectation in this direction. If both advisors agree to accept or reject the article, the decision is made automatically. Sometimes the recommendations of the advisors can be opposite to each other. Then, the review of a third advisor is sought, which delays the process a little. If the advisors' views are too far from each other, the editor in charge can apply the next step to decide whether to accept or reject the article. In this step, the responsible editor can request an urgent evaluation from someone else on the advisory board. In the articles that the time allocated to the consultants for the evaluation process has expired, the responsible editor may request an evaluation from other advisors by performing additional procedures. If the article is not found suitable for publication, it is sent back to the author with a letter explaining the reasons why the article is rejected. If the author thinks that there is an incorrect or dishonest evaluation, there is a right of objection. If a letter explaining why the decision should be reconsidered is sent to the editor-in-chief, the decision will be reviewed. After completing each round of the peer-review process, the editor responsible for making the necessary corrections according to the advisors' recommendations informs the authors by an official letter. When the authors make the necessary corrections on the article following the advisors' recommendations, the authors should send a list of these changes and their answers to the advisors. Authors should upload the revised manuscript to the online system within four weeks; otherwise, the author will be informed that the manuscript has been considered withdrawn. The revised version of the manuscript is usually re-submitted to at least one of the advisors in the first round and consulted whether the changes made are satisfactory. If the advisors are not satisfied with the changes, the letter can be re-referred to the advisory board for further evaluation. After this, the editor in charge checks whether or not the necessary corrections have been made in the article in line with the advisory board's suggestions and proceeds to the next step. If the responsible editor finds the corrections satisfactory, she/he saves her/his decision to end the evaluation process, and the final decision is made.
Decision-making Process
Editors are responsible for deciding on the acceptance or rejection of an article in line with two or more advisors' suggestions. Also, they are responsible for forwarding this decision to the author. By following the completion of each round of the peer-review process, a formal letter is sent to the author by the responsible editor, including the advisor's recommendations. Editor-in-Chief usually completes the process within two months from the article's submission until the final decision is made. Authors are informed by e-mail whether a manuscript is accepted for publication or not. Print drafts of accepted manuscripts are usually sent to authors for correction within the next four weeks. Authors should carefully review the submitted manuscript following the attached suggestions and return it within the appropriate time after making necessary corrections.
Editor in Chief
Prof. Dr. Süleyman ÇETİNKÜNAR
Address: Adana City Training and Research Hospital, General Surgery Clinic, Adana, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0001-9111-2734
E-mail: slmcetin@gmail.com
Editör:
Prof. Dr. Mevlüt KOÇ
Address: Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Cardiology Clinic, Adana, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0002-3000-4200
E-mail: mevlutkoc78@yahoo.com
OPEN ACCESS POLICY
The Journal of Eurasian Medical Science is an open-access scientific journal. Open access means the free presentation of all content without paying users or institutions on the principle that free public disclosure of studies will increase the sharing of information globally. All contents of our journal and this website are licensed under the rules of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC ) license. This situation is in line with the Budapest open access initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
The Creative Commons Attribution License allows users to copy, distribute and post an article, adapt the article, and use it non-commercially. The CC BY-NC license permits and non-commercial use of an open-access article as long as it is properly referred to its author.
In general, you can browse our website and access the full texts of all articles without introducing yourself or revealing any personal information.
The Journal of Eurasian Medical Science demands that authors, as rights holders, sign the copyright and ethics agreement and send it to the journal before the article's acceptance. The authors transfer all rights related to processing, copying, presentation, printing, distribution, and online submission to the Journal of Eurasian Medical Science with the permission of publishing to the Journal of Eurasian Medical Science. In this way, the journal has the right to publish the article and allows the verification of various issues, including the fact that the study in question is the author's original work and that it is based on valid research. It is licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows free sharing of work.
Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (on personal websites or in institutional repositories) before and after the review's submission, as this will enable more efficient sharing of information both earlier and more cited work.
PROCESSING CHARGE
All articles published in our journal are accessible and can be accessed online for free. Currently, the Journal of Eurasian Medical Science does not require any fees of evaluation and publication from the authors. This situation is possible thanks to the support of Adana City Training and Research Hospital. The journal aims not to charge publication fees as long as possible.
Scientific and Legal Responsibility of the Articles
Scientific and legal responsibility of the published articles belongs to the authors. Authors are responsible for the contents of the articles and accuracy of the references. Adana City Training and Research Hospital, the Editor-in-Chief, the Associated Editors or the Publisher do not accept any responsibility for the published articles.
Citation
J EUR MED SCI
