Duties of Editor

General responsibilities of the Editor and Editorial Board of the Karbala JM

Our editors comply with the code of conduct and COPE guidelines to advance knowledge within the journal’s fields of research. The editor and the editorial board of Karbala JM are responsible for the following:

1. Deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. In making these decisions, they are guided by the policies of the Karbala MJ and by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
2. Providing guidance to guest editors, authors, and reviewers on everything that is expected of them and also a description of peer review processes.
3. Providing new editorial board members with guidelines on everything that is expected of them and keeping existing members updated on new policies and developments.
4. evaluating manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic and intellectual merit, without regard to the author(s)’ race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnic origin, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation or social class.
5. Ensuring a fair and unbiased double-blind peer review of the manuscripts and that all information related to them is kept confidential. They also ensure that both authors’ and peer reviewers’ identities are protected.
6. Ensuring that appropriate reviewers are selected.
7. Developing and maintaining a database of suitable reviewers and updating it based on reviewer performance.
8. Ensuring that unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript are not used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
9. Taking reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints are presented concerning a submitted or published manuscript.
10. Publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies whenever needed.

Publication Decisions

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s validity and relevance to the journal’s scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

 Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Any potential editorial conflicts of interest will be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of the editor and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such declarations in the journal.

The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there should be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper that is published.

Journal metrics

The editor does not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons. Authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.

Vigilance over the published record

The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer, and editorial), in conjunction with the College of Medicine.

Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. The editor shall further make appropriate use of the publisher’s systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.

An editor presented with convincing evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the College of Medicine to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant.

Editorial Process

Pre-check

The managing editor of Karbala JM will conduct an initial inspection immediately after submission to determine including overall manuscript suitability for the journal, section, or special issue; and the high academic requirements of rigor that must be met by the manuscript to be eligible for additional review. The academic editor, who will be notified of the submission and invited to conduct a check and recommend reviewers, will be the Editor-in-Chief in the case of regular submissions, the Guest Editor in the case of submissions for Special Issues, or an Editorial Board member in the case of a conflict of interest and of regular submissions if the Editor-in-Chief permits.

The editor-in-chief has the discretion to seek amendments before peer review, reject a submission, or continue with the peer review process.

The only capacity in which the Guest Editor may participate in the review process is that of an author. Similarly, any of the Editorial Office are not permitted to observe the review of their manuscripts other than in their capacity as authors.

Peer Review 

General Guidelines for Peer Review and Editing

All submissions to be considered for publication in Karbala JM are expected to meet standards of academic excellence and are subject to rigorous, well-established, fair, and unbiased double-blind peer review performed by professionals. Upon arrival, the paper will undergo an initial review by the journal's managing editor to determine its acceptability and compliance with journal guidelines. Editors may discuss with experts before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission. 

The Editor-in-chief will then plan the independent experts' peer-review process and gather at least two review reports for each submission. Peer reviewers’ identities will remain anonymous to the authors. Before making a judgment, the editors will require sufficient modifications from the authors (and, if necessary, a second round of peer review). 

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final choice. We only publish articles that have been approved by highly qualified reviewers with expertise in a field appropriate for the article. The articles that have been accepted are copy- and English-edited.

Peer-review Process

All submitted manuscripts are expected to meet standards of academic excellence and are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor and, if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. Authors are required to present their scientific findings clearly and inspire a broad academic debate on the subject explored in the paper.

The Karbala JM journal operates a double-blind peer-review, where in addition to the author not knowing the identity of the reviewer, the reviewer is unaware of the author’s identity.

The conference journals operate a different peer review standard. For conference volumes, the peer review process is handled by the conference committee, and the review method as well as reports number are decided by the conference organizers' requirements; For standalone papers, the procedure is conducted by academics and researchers as a single-blind evaluation with at least one independent reviewer, with an Advisory Board Member making the final acceptance/rejection decision.

For every article that is submitted, at least two review reports are gathered. The editor-in-chief has the option to suggest reviewers during pre-check. In addition, qualified members of the Editorial Board, qualified reviewers from our database, or fresh reviewers found through online searches for similar articles will all be used by the Karbala JM editorial team.

Potential reviewers may be recommended by authors. The Karbala JM staff checks for any conflicts of interest and disqualifies people who may have them. During the initial submission of their paper, authors have the option to provide the names of potential peer-reviewers they do not want to be considered for the manuscript's peer review. As long as they do not obstruct the editorial team's ability to conduct an unbiased and complete evaluation of the submission, the editorial team will abide by these requirements.

 All reviewers undergo the following checks:

• have no financial ties to any of the authors;
• should not be affiliated with the authors' institution;
• should not have co-authored a publication within the last three years with the authors;
• possess appropriate expertise and a track record of publications in the topic represented by the submitted article (Scopus, ORCID);
• are seasoned academics in the subject matter of the research submitted;
• own a recognized and approved academic affiliation.

Reviewers who agree to examine a paper should:

• have no ties to any of the authors;
• possess the required knowledge to assess the level of a paper;
• throughout peer review, deliver high-quality review reports, and show responsiveness;
• uphold moral and professional norms.

After accepting a review invitation, reviewers have 7 days to complete their reviews on our online platform. Requests for extensions will be considered.

Reviewers are asked to provide their report for the evaluation of a revised article within seven days. On request, extensions may also be given.

The editor-in-chief may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.

From submission to final decision or publication, one dedicated (Karbala JM) staff member coordinates the review process and serves as the main point of contact for authors, academic editors, and reviewers.

. Revision

The editor-in-chief of the Karbala JM will ask the author to modify the article if only minor or large changes are needed. Before deciding whether to offer adjustments to authors when there are conflicting review reports or when there are one or more rejection recommendations, the editor requests input. Editors may at this point ask for more reviewers or more review reports.

Depending on whether the reviewer requested to see the revised version, revised versions of manuscripts may or may not be supplied to reviewers. 

Editor's final decision

After peer review, the editor-in-chief can decide whether to accept a manuscript after receiving at least two review reports. The Editor-in-Chief will look at the following before deciding:

• The appropriateness of the chosen reviewers' criticisms and the author's answer, as well as the paper's overall scientific quality.
• The Editor-in-Chief has the choice of accepting the work in its present form, accepting it with minor changes, rejecting it and declining resubmission, rejecting it but encouraging resubmission, asking the author to make improvements, or asking for a second reviewer.
• The editor-in-chief is free to disagree with the reviewers' recommendations. If they do, they ought to include an explanation of why for the benefit of the authors and reviewers. Sometimes a decision to accept a manuscript is supported by an editor despite a reviewer's suggestion to reject it. Before sending a final decision to the authors, the Editor-in-Chief of the Karbala JM will request a second, independent opinion from an Editorial Board member.
• The editor-in-chief is the only person who can approve an article for publication.