Early Release / Original Article

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Variants in COVID-19 Positive Patients

Okan Aydoğan and Others

Early Release / Original Article

COVID-19 Transmission in Healthcare Professionals in the First Period of the Pandemic

Nimet Ateş and Others

Early Release / Case Report

Monkeypox Virus Infection: First Two Cases in Turkey

Rıdvan Dumlu and Others

Most Read

Peer Review Process

Authors submit their articles through the Klimik Journal online manuscript submission system. The submitted manuscripts are first checked in terms of technical aspects. The language, figures, tables, necessary documents related to the article (author contribution form, copyright approval form, patient consent for case reports, ethics committee approval), references are reviewed, and plagiarism is checked. The manuscript that passes this stage is forwarded to the editor-in-chief. The editor-in-chief evaluates whether the manuscript’s content is compatible with the journal’s publication policy, whether it is prepared following the journal’s publication rules and the manuscript’s scientific contribution to the field. After this evaluation, if appropriate, the manuscript is directed to the editor to initiate the scientific content control process. The editor assigns at least two reviewers through the system to evaluate the manuscript’s scientific content and report their suggestions, criticisms, and contributions. They also direct it to the Statistics Editor when it deems necessary. The editor cares for selecting the reviewers among experts who do not have a conflict of interest with the authors. While the manuscript is sent to the reviewers, the information of the author and the institution where the study was conducted is hidden to prevent any bias. The editor evaluates the reviewers’ suggestions, criticisms, and contributions, and if they find them sufficient, forwards them to the author. When the editor deems it necessary, they direct the manuscript to other reviewers. The names of the reviewers are hidden while the suggestions, criticisms, and contributions are forwarded to the authors. Thus, it is ensured that the scientific content of the manuscripts is evaluated in a double-blind way, away from bias and objectively. After the authors make the necessary arrangements, the manuscript is sent back to the editor, and the editor sends it to the reviewers for re-evaluation. Manuscripts deemed sufficient in this evaluation are accepted for publication. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable for publication by the reviewers are rejected. Manuscripts for which they want new corrections and edits are sent back to the authors. After the manuscript accepted for publication is reviewed by the English and Turkish language editors, the publisher prepares it for publication and sends it to the authors for final check and approval. The ready articles are published on the journal’s website.

The Editor-in-chief evaluates articles regardless of the authors’ age, ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.

The reviewer evaluations should be objective. A reviewer is expected to evaluate by considering the following points:

  • Does the article contain new and essential information?
  • Does the abstract clearly describe the content of the article?
  • Is the hypothesis or aim of the study written clearly?
  • Is the research method clearly defined? Is the method appropriate to test the hypothesis?
  • Are the findings given clearly and briefly without adding any comment (for the “results” part)?
  • Are the comments made and conclusions supported by the findings (for the “discussion” part)?
  • Are adequate references given to national and international studies?
  • Is the language of the article appropriate and understandable?

The reviewers should ensure that all information regarding the submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published and report any copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s part to the editor.

If the reviewer is not competent on the article’s subject or if it does not seem possible to provide a timely response, they should inform the editor as soon as possible and ask them not to involve themselves in the referee process.

Articles are the private property of the authors. Reviewers and editorial board members may not discuss articles with other people.

Volume 35, Issue 3 Volume 35, Issue 2 Volume 35, Issue 1 Volume 34, Issue 3 Volume 34, Issue 2 Volume 34, Issue 1 Volume 33, Issue 3 Volume 33, Issue 2 Volume 33, Issue 1 Volume 32, Issue 3 Volume 32, Supplement 1 Volume 32, Supplement 2 Volume 32, Issue 2 Volume 32, Issue 1 Volume 31, Issue 3 Volume 31, Issue 2 Volume 31, Supplement 1 Volume 31, Issue 1 Volume 30, Issue 3 Volume 30, Issue 2 Volume 30, Supplement 1 Volume 30, Issue 1 Volume 29, Issue 3 Volume 29, Issue 2 Volume 29, Issue 1 Volume 28, Supplement 1 Volume 28, Issue 3 Volume 28, Issue 2 Volume 28, Issue 1 Volume 27, Supplement 1 Volume 27, Issue 3 Volume 27, Issue 2 Volume 27, Issue 1 Volume 26, Issue 3 Volume 26, Supplement 1 Volume 26, Issue 2 Volume 26, Issue 1 Volume 25, Issue 3 Volume 25, Issue 2 Volume 25, Issue 1 Volume 24, Issue 3 Volume 24, Issue 2 Volume 24, Issue 1 Volume 23, Issue 3 Volume 23, Issue 2 Volume 23, Issue 1 Volume 22, Issue 3 Volume 22, Issue 2 Volume 22, Issue 1 Volume 21, Issue 3 Volume 21, Supplement 2 Volume 21, Supplement 1 Volume 21, Issue 2 Volume 21, Issue 1 Volume 20, Issue 3 Volume 20, Supplement 2 Volume 20, Issue 2 Volume 20, Issue 1 Volume 20, Supplement 1 Volume 19, Issue 3 Volume 19, Issue 2 Volume 19, Issue 1 Volume 18, Issue 3 Volume 18, Supplement 1 Volume 18, Issue 2 Volume 18, Issue 1 Volume 17, Issue 3 Volume 17, Issue 2 Volume 17, Issue 1 Volume 16, Issue 3 Volume 16, Issue 2 Volume 16, Issue 1 Volume 1, Supplement 1 Volume 15, Issue 3 Volume 15, Issue 2 Volume 15, Issue 1 Volume 14, Issue 3 Volume 14, Issue 2 Volume 14, Issue 1 Volume 13, Issue 3 Volume 13, Issue 2 Volume 13, Supplement 1 Volume 13, Issue 1 Volume 12, Issue 3 Volume 12, Issue 2 Volume 12, Issue 1 Volume 11, Issue 3 Volume 11, Issue 2 Volume 11, Supplement 1 Volume 11, Issue 1 Volume 10, Issue 3 Volume 10, Issue 2 Volume 10, Issue 1 Volume 9, Issue 3 Volume 9, Issue 2 Volume 9, Issue 1 Volume 8, Issue 3 Volume 8, Issue 2 Volume 8, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 3 Volume 7, Issue 1 Volume 7, Issue 2 Volume 7, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 3 Volume 5, Issue 1 Volume 5, Issue 2 Volume 5, Issue 3 Volume 6, Issue 1 Volume 6, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 1 Volume 3, Issue 2 Volume 3, Issue 3 Volume 4, Issue 1 Volume 4, Issue 2 Volume 1, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 1 Volume 2, Issue 2 Volume 2, Issue 3 Volume 1, Issue 1