Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences

• Review Policy

The Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences follows a double-blind peer-reviewed policy, in which both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. The reviewers are seriously requested not to reveal themselves to the authors.
All manuscripts are considered to be confidential. They are peer-reviewed by at least 4 anonymous reviewers selected by the Editorial Board. The corresponding author is notified as soon as possible of the editor decision to accept, reject, or require modifications. As soon as the manuscript is completely acceptable according to the criteria set forth in the journal instructions, it will be scheduled for the next available issue.

• Review Policy

The Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences follows a double-blind peer-reviewed policy, in which both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. The reviewers are seriously requested not to reveal themselves to the authors.
All manuscripts are considered to be confidential. They are peer-reviewed by at least 4 anonymous reviewers selected by the Editorial Board. The corresponding author is notified as soon as possible of the editor decision to accept, reject, or require modifications. As soon as the manuscript is completely acceptable according to the criteria set forth in the journal instructions, it will be scheduled for the next available issue.

Reviewers Section
 

• For Reviewers

The review process is a significant aspect of the publication process of an article. The reviewers’ comments on an article help the editor to make appropriate decisions on an article and also enable the author to improve the manuscript.
The Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences (JRUMS) uses double-blind peer- review system. The JRUMS relies on the reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to work objectively and fairly. It is hoped that the information presented here will be helpful for the reviewers.

• Reviewers’ Responsibilities

The JRUMS’ reviewers are requested to review the manuscripts critically but constructively. They have to provide detailed comments regarding the manuscript to help the authors improve their work. Noticing the determined deadline is of high importance. The reviewers are asked to notify the editor about any potential conflicts of interest in regard to the authors or the content of a manuscript. They are expected to report possible research misconducts (plagiarism, duplication, and data manipulation). They must keep the confidentiality of the document. They are not permitted to have any direct contact with the authors or pass the manuscript to another reviewer.
Originality, scientific reliability, data validity, ethical aspects, and scientific misconduct are among the factors that must be considered by the reviewers.