GMT Time


    Journal Policy

    210 View   |   1 Rating
    Updated   05/09/2017 12:31 AM






























    Journal Policy

    The journal's mission is to publish high-quality original research results performed in the field of veterinary medicine, animal production, life sciences, disease cases, research notes and small materials.The importance is given to the formation of information space aimed at enhancing the professional competence of specialists in this field.

    • The review process                                                                                                                                  

    All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review (although these decisions may be based on informal advice from specialists in the field).

    Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to one or two reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice.


    • Selecting peer-reviewers

    Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. For instance, we avoid using people who are slow, careless or do not provide reasoning for their views, whether harsh or lenient.

    We check with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review. Reviewers should bear in mind that these messages contain confidential information, which should be treated as such.

    • Writing the review

    The primary purpose of the review is to provide the editors with the information needed to reach a decision. The review should also instruct the authors as to how they can strengthen their paper to the point where it may be acceptable. As far as possible, a negative review should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that rejected authors can understand the basis for the decision and see in broad terms what needs to be done to improve the manuscript. This is secondary to the other functions, however, and referees should not feel obliged to provide detailed, constructive advice to the authors of papers that do not meet the criteria for the journal (as outlined in the letter from the editor when asking for the review). If the reviewer believes that a manuscript would not be suitable for publication, his/her report to the author should be as brief as is consistent with enabling the author to understand the reason for the decision

    Open Access


    The first & last issue

    Creative Commons


    Secretarial editor of the Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Medicine Iraq - Baghdad - Al-Jadriyah - College of Veterinary Medicine - Bagh. Uni. Post Office Al-Karrada district 47036 Baghdad University - College of Veterinary Medicine: Web site: or Tel(+964)-0782566786