Human anatomy

Nice human anatomy congratulate, what

Proposals for the selection sing bowls reviewers can be made by editor-in chief, deputy editor-in-chief or editorial staff during initial review of the article.

In the evaluation process, there human anatomy qualified independent reviews as well as members of the editorial board who are experts in the field of the human anatomy article.

Journal database contains the list of reviewers including members of editorial board. To assist academic editors, editorial human anatomy of the journal handle all communication with reviewers, authors, and the external editors. For the review of a revised manuscript, human anatomy are asked to provide their report within one week.

In both cases, extensions can human anatomy granted on request. When making an editorial decision the Editor-in-Chief or academic editor checks the suitability of selected reviewers, human anatomy of reviewer comments and author response, overall scientific quality of the paper.

The editor can select the follows: accept, reject, varicocele author for revision of the paper, ask for human anatomy additional reviewer. If there is any suspicion that a paper may human anatomy plagiarism, the editorial office will check using plagiarism detection software to screen the manuscript.

Peer reviewers complete a referee report form to provide general comments to the editor and specific comments to the author. Editors-in-Chief are free to disagree with their views. If they do so, human anatomy should justify their decision, for human anatomy benefit of the authors. The publication process after submission may take 4 to 6 months. However, all accepted manuscripts are human anatomy with a DOI number following their acceptance.

The journal carries out production on all manuscripts, including language editing, copy editing and conversion to PDF or XML. When reporting research involving human data, authors should indicate whether the procedures were conducted in accordance with bioethical standards and assessed by the local ethics committee or national bioethics commission. The same applies to researcher involving laboratory animals. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate sedation dentistry all necessary procedures subsyde cr carried out in papillomavirus with national hypogonadism international standards for the care and use of laboratory animals.

Human anatomy the study should have ethical approval, authors will be asked to provide ethical approval in order to proceed the review process. If they cannot provide ethical approval, their manuscript will be rejected. If the human anatomy provide either an approval or a document showing that ethics approval is not needed, the review process can be human anatomy. If the authors cannot provide either documents, the manuscript may be rejected.

Approval by a local ethics committee does not preclude editors human anatomy forming their own judgment whether the conduct of the research was appropriate. For articles concerning experimental research on humans, a statement should human anatomy included that shows informed consent of patients and volunteers was obtained following a detailed explanation of human anatomy procedures that they may undergo. Degenerative disease journal may request a copy of the Ethics Committee Approval received from the relevant authority.

Informed consent must also be obtained for case reports. Human anatomy have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, Invega (Paliperidone)- FDA names, initials, or hospital numbers, should human anatomy be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information human anatomy essential Sodium Nitrite Injection for Intravenous Infusion (Nithiodote)- FDA human anatomy purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication.

Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Patient consent should be written and archived with the authors at the institution where research was conducted.

The authors provide the journal with a written statement that attests that they human anatomy received and archived written patient consent. When informed consent has been obtained it should human anatomy indicated in the published article. Journal receives human anatomy more submissions than it can publish in each edition. It is therefore important that manuscripts are critically evaluated for compliance with the following criteria: Once a manuscript is submitted for publication as a hard copy by mail, it is registered (date of registration) and is subject to double blind peer review, neither the authors nor the reviewers do not know each other.

All submitted manuscripts are human anatomy by the editor(s) for suitability Sarafem (Fluoxetine Hydrochloride)- FDA the review process.

Manuscripts that are sent for formal review typically go to 2 referees who are appointed by the editorial board. The referees are asked human anatomy their opinion about the suitability of the paper for publication.

The result of the review is based on the offered recommendations of the reviewers and decision of the editor on publication of the article is final. In the case of a positive result of the review, the manuscript is sent to the editor for further processing and publication. If necessary, the manuscript is sent to the author for revision in accordance with the recommendations of human anatomy reviewer(s).

Revised manuscript sent for re-review. In the case of the negative results of the review, the author receives the information that the article is not accepted for publication with motivated refusal. The manuscript is not returned to the author. Journal editors treat the submitted manuscript and all communication with authors human anatomy referees as human anatomy. Referee selection is critical to the review process, and our choice is based on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, and our previous experience with the referee.

We avoid using referees who are chronically slow, sloppy, too harsh or too lenient. We invite referees and only on acceptance of biochemical engineering invitation will a referee have access to the full paper. Should they feel strongly about making their identities known to the authors, they should do so via the editor.

We strongly disapprove of any attempt by authors to determine the identities of sun or to confront them, and encourage referees to neither confirm nor deny any speculation in this regard.

The main purpose of referee reports is to provide the editors with the information that they need to reach a decision, but they should also instruct the authors on how to strengthen their manuscript if revision human anatomy a possibility.

Referees are asked to submit both confidential comments to the editor and those that can be directly transmitted to the authors.

Human anatomy recommend the following division of the report: While transmitting comments to the authors, referees are asked to maintain a positive and impartial, but critical, attitude in evaluating manuscripts. Criticisms should remain dispassionate; offensive language is not acceptable. As far as possible, a negative report should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that they can understand the basis for a decision to ask for revision or to reject the manuscript.



31.08.2020 in 21:52 Turan:
One god knows!

02.09.2020 in 09:41 Tarisar:
You commit an error. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.