Peer Review Process

All submissions to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review to warrant the quality of manuscripts that will be finally published. The editors have the right not to have a manuscript undergo review if the manuscript: (a) mainly addresses a subject outside the aim and scope of our journal, (b) contains technical drawbacks, and (c) has no salience and has been written in poor English.

This review consists of the following steps:

  1. In the first stage, an internal staff checks the format and style of the manuscript to ensure that it is suitable to go through the usual peer-review process. If the authors have not considered the guides, the manuscript will be sent back to the authors for compatibility.
  2. Submissions are then assigned to an Editor for evaluation.
  3. The Editor decides whether reviews from additional experts are needed to evaluate the manuscript. At least two reviewers evaluate most submissions, but it is up to the Editor to determine the number of reviews.
  4. After evaluation, the Editor chooses between the following decisions:
  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

 Authors usually have 15 days to resubmit the revised manuscript if the decision is Minor Revision or Major Revision. Authors may contact the email address if they require an extension.  Upon resubmission, the Editor may return the manuscript to the reviewers or decide based on personal expertise. Finally, Managing Editor receives the reviewers’ comments and sends them with a decision letter to the corresponding author. The Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision on each manuscript.

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal fulfill the conditions of publication after peer review(s) and revision(s). The decisions are based on the journal’s policies and constrained by certain considerations that are likely to create legal issues such as plagiarism, libel, and copyright infringement. 

Fair Play

The editor examines manuscripts irrespective of gender, race, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religious belief, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making decisions about a submitted manuscript and may also aid the author in enhancing the manuscript through feedback and revisions.


If a reviewer cannot review a manuscript or knows that he/she cannot review the manuscript within the specified time limit, he/she should notify the journal.


All submitted manuscripts must be regarded as confidential. Unless the editor provides permission, they must not be revealed or discussed with others.

The peer-review process is shown diagrammatically as follows:



Reza Imani   

Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases, Department of Infectious Diseases, Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran. 

 Email: eimani@skums.ac.ir



Soleiman Kheiri  

Professor of Biostatistics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran. 

 Email: kheiri@skums.ac.ir

Indexing & Abstracting








Follower of



 Powered by