Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper. Reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the reviewer’s citation count or enhance the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

General Reviewer's responsibilities

  1. Peer review assists the editor and executive editorial board of Karbala MJ in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
  2. Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
  1. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
  2. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
  3. Reviewers must report to the editor of the Karbala MJ if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s part.
  4. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the paper.
  5. Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on content without regard to the authors’ race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation, or social class.
  6. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.5. Duties of Publisher

As publisher of the Karbala MJ, the College of Medicine has a role to

  • provide practical and financial support to the editor and editorial board of Karbala MJ so that they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for the Journal;
  • ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions;
  • protect intellectual property and copyright;
  • ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards defined above.