Peer Review Process

At the Diyala Journal for Veterinary Sciences (DJVS), we follow a double-blind peer review system — meaning both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the entire review process to ensure fairness and objectivity.

All manuscripts must be submitted through our online manuscript management system. Authors will need to register an account before submitting their work. Here’s how our review process works, step by step:

 Submission of Manuscript

The corresponding (or submitting) author uploads the manuscript via the DJVS online system.

 Initial Check

Our Editorial Director reviews the submission to ensure it meets the journal’s formatting, structure, and completeness guidelines. No evaluation of the scientific content happens at this stage.

 Editor-in-Chief Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief then reviews the manuscript to decide whether it fits within the scope of the journal and offers original, relevant content. Manuscripts that don’t meet these criteria are politely declined at this stage, before peer review.

 Plagiarism Screening

Every manuscript is checked for originality using Turnitin plagiarism detection software. If a manuscript shows more than 20% similarity, it will be rejected.

 Reviewer Selection

The Editor-in-Chief invites qualified reviewers with expertise in the manuscript’s subject area. Usually, two reviewers are assigned or three, though additional reviewers may be invited if necessary.

 Reviewer Invitation Response

Invited reviewers consider the invitation, checking for potential conflicts of interest, their availability, and whether the topic aligns with their expertise. They then accept or decline the review request.

 Peer Review

Accepted reviewers carefully read and evaluate the manuscript, noting its strengths and areas for improvement. Each reviewer provides a clear recommendation:

  • Accept

  • Minor revision

  • Major revision

  • Reject

They also offer constructive, anonymous feedback for the author.

Language Reviewer Assessment

In parallel with scientific peer review, a Language Reviewer (or Language Editor) reviews the manuscript’s:

  • Grammar, spelling, and language clarity

  • Academic writing style

  • Consistency in terminology and presentation

The Language Reviewer provides recommendations for improving readability and clarity. Authors may be asked to revise language issues before or after scientific revisions.

 Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief reviews all the feedback and recommendations. If there’s a significant difference of opinion between reviewers, a third reviewer may be consulted before a final decision is made.

 Author Notification

The corresponding author is notified of the preliminary decision, along with anonymized reviewer comments.

 Manuscript Revision

If revisions are requested, the author makes the necessary changes, clearly marking updates in red text or with a highlighted background for easy review.

 Final Decision and Publication

Once the revised manuscript is accepted, the author is asked to pay the publication fee. The manuscript is then prepared for publication, formatted, and finalized for release in the journal.