Fırat University Health Sciences Veterinary Journal adheres to research and publication ethics standards. The publication processes of the journal are carried out on the basis of the objective evaluation, development and sharing of qualified scientific articles in their fields such as clinical and experimental research articles in various branches of health, original case reports and invited literature reviews.

In this context, in line with the guidelines and policies published by the authors, journal editors, reviewers and publisher ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and "Committe on Publication Ethics - COPE (https://publicationethics.org/)" should move.

Responsibilities of Publications and Authors;

Assuming that the scientific studies submitted for publication in our journal are made in accordance with the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, Regulation on the Welfare and Protection of Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, and that all necessary institutional ethical and legal permissions have been obtained, The journal management does not accept any responsibility in this regard.

If the "Animal" element is used in the study, the authors must state that they protect animal rights in their work and have received approval from the relevant ethics committee in the Materials and Methods section of the article. The aforementioned approval information, material and method section should include the statement “The approval of the Local Ethics Committee has been obtained” or “The principles of the Local Ethics Committee have been complied with”. If the approval of the Local Ethics Committee has been obtained, the Author(s) should indicate the institution and approval number from which the ethics committee approval has been obtained. Our journal expects and supports the 3R (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) rule in the use of experimental animals in accordance with the European consensus-platform for alternatives strategies in the submitted scientific studies. In case of approval or permission from different ethics committees (for example, clinical research ethics committee approval), the evaluation of the articles noticed during the evaluation is suspended.

It is the authors' responsibility to start the study by obtaining all the necessary permits (such as a work permit for wildlife) from the necessary institutions and organizations within the framework of international and national regulations regarding the studies. The journal cannot be held responsible in this regard.

In order for any article made within the borders of Turkey and converted into an article on diseases accepted as obligatory to be reported by the Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock to be evaluated in the journal, it is obligatory to submit the permission letter received from the Ministry to the editorship along with the article.

When the article is sent by the responsible author through the system, it is considered that part or all of the article has not been published elsewhere and is not in the process of being evaluated in another journal at the same time. All authors are deemed to have declared that they agree with the content and about the publication. The situation of financial support and conflict of interest should also be reported to the editor at the time of application.

References should be numbered according to the order of use in the text, and should be cited in parentheses after a single spacing. All of the sources used should be presented in a list at the end of the text and all the sources should be used in the text. In cases where there are six or more authors; after the third name “et al.” The expression “et al” should be used in English sources. Journal abbreviations should be in accordance with Index Veterinarius. Responsibility for errors in the writing of references belongs to the author(s). Personal opinions and unpublished information should not be cited.

While preparing Turkish articles, the resources prepared by the Turkish Language Institution should be taken as a basis for language and vocabulary rules.

If there are institutions or organizations that support the research, an asterisk should be placed at the end of the article title as a superscript, and the necessary explanation should be made in the footnotes of the first page of the article.

The articles sent to the journal for publication are checked with a suitable program for similarity. Articles with 20% or more similarity as a result of the control are rejected. Detecting plagiarism can result in an article being rejected even after acceptance.

Articles sent for publication in the journal are sent to the journal with the "Copyright Transfer Agreement" signed by all authors.

Since the printing corrections of the submitted articles are made according to the original text, all responsibilities (ethical, scientific, legal, etc.) of the articles belong to the authors.

Manuscripts should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the journal writing rules (http://veteriner.fusabil.org/veteriner.php3?id=119). The authors have accepted the detailed evaluation process of the articles they sent, and the authors whose names are included in the article are deemed to have declared that all kinds of data in the article are real and original.

Authors are obliged to make any corrections requested by the referees and the editor regarding their peer-reviewed articles.

The decision regarding the publication of the studies deemed suitable for publication is notified to the responsible author.

Articles sent to the journal are published according to the acceptance date. The journal reserves the right to change the order when it deems necessary.

No fee is charged for the printing and publishing of the articles. No payment is made to the authors for the publication of their articles.

Responsibilities of the Referees:

Referee evaluation; It is effective in deciding the editors on the publication of the work and in improving the work to the authors through editorial communication. Peer-reviews are formally an essential element of scholarly communication.

For the review of the publications, at least two referees are appointed by the editor(s) according to the content of the studies and the field of expertise of the referees. All referee evaluation reports are sent electronically anonymously. The names of the referees who made the evaluation are not mentioned in the reports and the journal due to the double-blind method. In the last issue of each year, all referees are thanked.

Invited referee candidates, who think that the work sent to the referee for evaluation is not suitable for reviewing or that they cannot evaluate within the given time, should immediately report the situation and prevent the process from being disrupted.

Studies sent to referees for evaluation are confidential documents and should be evaluated as such. Work should not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor (only under exceptional and special circumstances). Any unpublished data found in the evaluated study should not be used by the referee in their own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used by the referee for personal advantage. This also applies to referees who decline an invitation to review.

The referees involved in the evaluation of the article should evaluate objectively and impartially. Personal criticisms that are not fully related to the study can be considered “inappropriate”.

Referees who have a conflict of interest with the authors of the article or the institutions and organizations that support the article should not evaluate the article by informing the editor of the situation.

Referees should also have a good grasp of studies that are related to the study but not cited by the authors. Observe any statement that is a derivation or discussion about a data reported in previously published studies. The reviewer should also notify the editors of any significant similarity or overlap between the work in question and any other similar work (published or unpublished).

The referees, who have come to the conclusion that the article can be published by requesting correction, have the right to re-examine the article after the necessary corrections are made.

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board:

Preliminary evaluations of the articles are made by the "Editorial Board".

Articles are sent to at least two referees by the Editorial Board for evaluation. Depending on the referee reports, the Editorial Board decides on the acceptance, rejection or modification of the articles.

When the article evaluation process is completed, the editor forwards the decision to the responsible author.