Reviewer Responsibilities

Diyala Journal for Veterinary Sciences (DJVS)

Double-Blind, Open-Access, Peer-Reviewed Journal

Diyala Journal for Veterinary Sciences (DJVS) relies on the expertise and integrity of its reviewers to maintain the quality and credibility of published research. As part of a double-blind peer-review process, both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other to ensure impartial, unbiased evaluations.

Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following responsibilities when assessing manuscripts submitted to DJVS:

 1. Confidentiality

• All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
• Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose manuscript details to any third party.
• Information obtained during the peer-review process must not be used for personal or professional advantage.

2. Objectivity and Impartiality

• Reviews should be conducted objectively and free from personal or professional bias.
• Criticisms should be constructive, clear, and supported by evidence.
• Reviewers should refrain from reviewing manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist with any of the authors, institutions, or funding agencies associated with the work.

 3. Timeliness

• Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the time frame agreed upon when accepting the review invitation.
• If unable to meet the deadline, reviewers must promptly inform the editorial office so alternative arrangements can be made.

 4. Ethical Considerations

• Reviewers should notify the editorial office of any ethical concerns related to the manuscript, such as:
• Potential plagiarism.
• Data fabrication or falsification.
• Ethical issues in animal or human research.
• Significant conflicts of interest not disclosed by the authors.

 5. Quality and Academic Rigor

Reviewers should assess:

• The originality and significance of the research.
• The clarity of the objectives and methodology.
• The accuracy and relevance of data analysis and interpretation.
• The validity of conclusions drawn from the findings.
• The appropriateness and completeness of references.

 6. Constructive Feedback

• Provide clear, detailed, and constructive comments to help authors improve their work.
• Avoid vague, derogatory, or personal remarks.
• Suggestions for improvement should be specific and supported by evidence or literature where possible.

 7. Adherence to Journal Scope

• Reviewers should ensure that the manuscript falls within the aims and scope of DJVS, which includes basic, clinical, and public health veterinary sciences, zoonoses, and related interdisciplinary fields.

 8. Double-Blind Integrity

• Reviewers must refrain from attempting to discover the identity of the authors.
• Any suspicions of author identity should be reported confidentially to the editorial office, without disclosing it in the review report.

 Commitment to Ethical Reviewing

By accepting a review invitation for DJVS, reviewers confirm their commitment to these responsibilities and to maintaining the highest standards of ethical conduct in scholarly publishing.