• All articles submitted for publication to the Turkish Journal of Veterinary Surgery are reviewed by the chief editor and branch editor for plagiarism. As a result of the control, articles that are similar to other studies are rejected, or articles that are thought to be similar are sent to the authors for re-editing by the editor.
• Articles uploaded to the system for publication are checked by the editor-in-chief and the branch editor, and if deemed appropriate, they are submitted to referee evaluation with a double-blind referee system.
• The title page of the article should include the ORCID numbers of the authors, author contributions, whether there is a conflict of interest, and ethics committee information.
• Authors must accept all responsibilities of the article they upload to the system and transfer the copyright to the Turkish Journal of Veterinary Surgery. Authors of articles sent to the journal must fill out a "Copyright Transfer Agreement Form”, sign it with a wet signature and upload it to the system. Articles of authors who do not submit the Copyright Transfer Agreement Form with wet signature will not be taken into consideration.
• Personal information such as author names and e-mail addresses entered into the Turkish Journal of Veterinary Surgery system is used only for the scientific purposes of this journal. This information is not used for any other purpose and is not shared with other people.
• Turkish Journal of Veterinary Surgery is archived electronically in the "DergiPark" system and other indexes where the journal is located.
Article Evaluation Processes
The following steps are followed in order to ensure an impartial evaluation process of the articles sent to the Turkish Journal of Veterinary Surgery;
1. Uploading the article to the system by the corresponding author,
2. Preliminary review of the article by the editor-in-chief,
3. Appointment of the branch editor, direct rejection of the article as a result of evaluation of its suitability for the journal and its originality, or appointment of a referee for the appropriate article,
4. Referee invitation (at least two referees),
5. Reviewers' evaluations,
6. Editor's review of referee evaluations,
7. The editor transmits decision information, including referee evaluations, to the corresponding author,
8. Sending the articles that received Major / Minor Revision during the peer-review process to the author for re-editing.
9. Second evaluation by the referees of the article sent to the corresponding author for review,
10. Notifying the corresponding author of the editor's decision as Acceptance / Rejection (if minor corrections are made by the referees, the editor may not send the article back to the referees),
11. Articles that complete the process positively are sent to the Language and / or Statistics Editor by the editor-in-chief,
12. The editor-in-chief assigns the final publishable version of the article to the issue and publishes the article.
For authors;
• Authors are responsible for submitting original works and cannot represent any data, text or figures belonging to others' works as their own.
• The correspondig author must ensure that there are no authors in the author list who have not contributed to the article, must obtain the approval of all authors who have contributed to the study, and declare that all authors have seen and approved the final version of the study and have agreed to be published.
• Studies describing the same research findings cannot be published in more than one journal. For this reason, authors should not submit scientific data previously published in another journal as an article to the journal. Additionally, it is ethically unacceptable to submit an article for publication to more than one journal at the same time.
• If support has been received for the study in the article, other information such as project information (project number, etc.), financial support sources, master's and doctoral thesis study notification should be provided.
• Authors must indicate the refences they used in the article in the reference list.

For referees;
• Articles submitted to the journal for publication are evaluated by the editors by sending them to at least two referees. The editor evaluates the article objectively by examining the decisions of all referees.
• Referees assist the editors in deciding whether to publish the article and the authors in making the necessary improvements in the article. Referee opinions are the fundamental component at the heart of scientific evaluation.
• Referees who have been sent an article for evaluation must notify their positive or negative decision as to whether they can evaluate, and the referees who will evaluate must notify their decision regarding the article within the evaluation period given to them.
• Articles sent to referees for evaluation should not be shared with other authors. A similar situation applies to referees who reject the invitation to evaluate.
• The evaluation of the article by the referees should be made objectively, the criticisms made should contribute to the development of the article by the authors, and the expressions used should be stated with supporting arguments in the article.
• Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used by the referee for personal gain. A similar situation applies to referees who reject the invitation to evaluate.
• Articles evaluated by referees must be uploaded to the journal system as separate files together with the journal's “Referee Evaluation Report”.