Peer Review Process
The Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences (IJVS) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure the highest standards of scientific quality, integrity, and editorial independence. All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission system and undergo the following steps:
1. Submission of the Manuscript
The corresponding author submits the manuscript through the IJVS online submission platform.
2. Initial Structural Assessment
The Executive Director checks the manuscript for compliance with the journal’s Author Guidelines, ensuring that required sections, formatting, and documentation are complete.
(This step does not evaluate scientific quality.)
3. Editor-in-Chief Evaluation
The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) reviews the manuscript to confirm:
- Suitability within the aims and scope
- Basic scientific soundness
- Originality
- Ethical compliance
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.
4. Plagiarism Screening
Before peer review, all submissions are checked with iThenticate plagiarism detection software.
- Similarity < 20% → proceeds to peer review
- Similarity ≥ 20% → rejected for excessive similarity
5. Assignment and Invitation of Reviewers
The EIC selects independent external reviewers based on subject expertise and academic reputation. Reviewers must:
- Be from institutions different from the authors
- Not be members of the IJVS Editorial Board
- Have no conflicts of interest
Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the final decision is made by the editorial office.
Invitations are sent until two or three reviewers accept (IJVS commonly requests three reviews, but accepts two completed reviews to proceed).
6. Reviewer Acceptance or Decline
Invited reviewers assess whether the manuscript fits their expertise, available time, and conflict-of-interest policies before accepting or declining the assignment.
7. Double-Blind Peer Review
Under the double-blind format:
- Reviewers do not know the authors’ identities
- Authors do not know the reviewers’ identities
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for:
- Scientific quality and originality
- Methodological rigor
- Clarity and organization
- Validity of results
- Ethical standards
Reviewers submit a detailed report with one of the following recommendations:
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
8. Editorial Evaluation of Reviews
The EIC carefully considers all reviewer reports before making a decision.
If reviewer opinions differ significantly, the EIC may invite an additional reviewer.
9. Primary Editorial Decision
The EIC sends a decision letter to the corresponding author through the online system, including anonymized reviewer comments.
Authors typically receive a decision within 1–2 months of submission.
10. Revision Phase
If revisions are requested, the author must:
- Address all reviewer comments in detail
- Highlight changes in the revised manuscript (e.g., red font or colored shading)
- Upload a response letter explaining modifications
The revised manuscript may undergo further review if needed.
11. Final Decision
After evaluating the revised manuscript, the EIC issues the final decision.
If accepted:
- The author pays the publication fee (150 USD)
- The manuscript proceeds to layout design and production
- The final version is published online as open access under CC BY 4.0
Key Features of IJVS Peer Review
- Fully double-blind process
- Total independence of reviewers from authors’ institutions
- Editorial Board members do not serve as reviewers but help identify qualified experts
- Strict plagiarism screening with iThenticate
- Transparent and ethical editorial workflow
1. Submission of Article: The corresponding or submitting author submits the article to the IJVS. This is usually via an online system.
2. Structural Assessment: The Exudative Director checks the article's composition and arrangement against the journal's Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the article is not assessed at this point.
3. Editor-in-Chief Assessment and Processing: The Editor-in-Chief checks that the article is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the article may be rejected without being reviewed any further.
4. Plagiarism Checkup: The article at this step is tested by Ithenticate for similarity results, if it is less than 20%, the article is considered for reviewer assigning; else, the article is rejected due to similarity results.
5. Invitation to Reviewers: The Editor-in-Chief sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained (two accepted reviewer decisions).
6. Response to Invitations: Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline.
7. Review is Conducted: The reviewer sets time aside to read the article several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the article without further work. Otherwise, they will read the article several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
8. Journal Evaluates the Reviews: The Editor-in-Chief considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
9. Primarily Decision: The Editor-in-Chief sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. The reviewer's name is anonymous to the author (s).
10. Author Send Revised Manuscript: The author should do the changes asked by the reviewer to do, and should highlight these changes in red or yellow shadow.
11- Final Decision: If accepted, the author should pay the publication fee, and the article sends to the page designer then to the publisher.