There is no charge for the publication of the manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Theory and Practice in Healthcare and for the execution of the relevant stages.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must comply with the purpose and scope of the journal and with the rules of writing and publication specified by the editorial board.
The submission stages include the following steps:
- The author(s) can send the file they prepared as a “Word” document in accordance with our specified spelling directive via our e-mail address “firstname.lastname@example.org.” Once the e-mail is sent, feedback is given that the application has been received.
- Manuscripts submitted for application are subjected to pre-review in the first place. During this stage, they are evaluated primarily by journal editor to check their compliance with the journal’s purpose and scope. Manuscripts deemed to be incompatible with the journal’s purpose and scope are directly rejected.
- Manuscripts found appropriate in terms of purpose and scope are reviewed by the technical editors and language editors in terms of their compliance with spelling rules and format requirements and if required, they are sent back to the author(s) for the necessary corrections before being referred to the reviewers.
- Manuscripts that successfully pass the pre-review process are sent to two different reviewers for review, without author information, by the decision of the editorial board, taking into account their field of expertise. The reviewing process is completed with one of the options “The article can be published as it is”, “The article can be published after minor corrections”, “The article can be published after major corrections”, “The article cannot be published” or “It is recommended to submit again after improvement”. A study is included in the publication schedule following the decisions of at least two different reviewers stating one of the options: “The article can be published as it is”, “The article can be published after minor corrections” and / or “The article can be published after major corrections”. Proposed corrections are checked by the relevant reviewer. If the relevant reviewer is of the opinion that the suggested corrections have not been made, he/she may also reject the publication of the study at this stage. Corrections made in line with the recommendations must be reported to the relevant reviewer in a separate text.
- If one of the two reviewers to whom the study has been assigned for review has expressed the opinion that “The article can be published as it is”, “The article can be published after minor corrections”, “The article can be published after major corrections” and if the other reviewer has decided on one of the options “The article cannot be published” or “It is recommended to submit again with improvement”, then the study is referred to a third reviewer for evaluation by the editorial board.
- The authors must make the necessary corrections in line with the correction demands from the reviewers and send their work within 15 days at the latest after the e-mail date of the decision. If this period is exceeded, the editorial board has the right to include the work in the next issue or to remove it from the publication schedule.
- The articles, in which two different reviewers gave their opinion that they could be published and determined that the necessary corrections were made are finally examined by a statistical analysis editor according to the nature of the study. The statistical analysis editor has the right to request corrections at this process. Articles that complete the statistical analysis review process are added to the publication schedule and published in the first appropriate issue.
The review process of the manuscripts referred to the reviewers by the editorial board is 15 days.
Regardless of the publication status of the article they review, a “Reviewer Certificate” is sent via e-mail to the reviewers who contribute through the review stages.