Urology Research & Practice

The Journal's peer review policy and procedures

After receipt of the article through the electronic submission system, it will be considered by the editorial team in 24-48 hours. The texts will be checked in terms of accordance with Journal's Instructions for Authors format and plagiarism by using iThenticate similarity Check system for identifying.

After the initial checking, the editorial team will submit the article to the Editor. The Editor will check the article in terms of Journal’s scope, style and format, originality, and scientific quality. If the topic is of interest for publication, the Editor will send the manuscript to the associated editor for initial critical review. After initial critical review, if the article considered as a qualified article, at least three reviewers will be assigned to evaluate the quality of the study. At that time, biostatistical Editor will check the article according to the Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature: The SAMPL Guidelines (https://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SAMPL-Guidelines-6-27-13.pdf), as well. After a period varying from one to several weeks, the authors will then receive the reviewers' evaluations and will be required to provide all further information requested and the corrections that may be necessary for publication. The reviewers, as well as the Editorial Team and the Editor-in-Chief, may also deem the article to be unsuitable for publication by Urology Research and Practice at this point.

After peer review, if the manuscript found to be suitable for publication through its scientific merit will be considered "provisionally accepted". The editorial team will then provide page proofs for the authors to review and approve. No article is published without this final author approval. All authors should review the proof, although the Journal asks the corresponding author to give final approval.

EISSN 2149-3057