Rules for Evaluating Scientific Works Submitted for Publication in the Journal

In pursuit of the journal to present valuable scientific works, all scientific works submitted for publication on its pages are subject to confidential evaluation in accordance with the following rules and regulations: (This is after accepting the abstract by the editorial board).

1. The scientific works submitted for publication on the pages of the journal are evaluated by specialized professors who are certified for their competence and integrity.
2. Evaluators evaluate the scientific works without prejudice to them and submit their observations and scientific opinions about them in writing according to the forms prepared by the editorial board of the journal.
3. The evaluator is committed to confidentiality and objectivity in the evaluation, following the scientific methods of evaluation (objectivity and formality).
4. The degree of evaluation of scientific work shall be one hundred marks according to the following bases:
   • Commitment to the methodology - 20 marks
   • The seriousness of the subject - 35 marks
   • Language and writing style - 20 marks
   • Resources and references - 10 marks
   • Findings and recommendations - 15 marks
5. The results of the evaluation are as follows:
   • Publishable with notes, Unfit for publication.
   • Scientific work is not accepted for publication unless it obtains 70% of the prescribed grades.

The specified period of evaluation is 30 days from the date of receipt of the reviewer for the scientific work. If the period lapses without the reviewer submitting the results of his evaluation, the editorial board may dispense with his evaluation and not count it, and his right to claim the evaluation reward is forfeited, and the editorial board refers the work to another reviewer, and the evaluation results may be accepted if the reviewer presents the reasons for the delay if accepted by the editorial committee.

The scientific work is returned to its sources, accompanied by the evaluator's notes to adopt it or push it on practical grounds, in the event that the evaluator concludes that the work is valid for publication with observations, and if opinions conflict and conflict between the results of the evaluation and the submitter of the scientific material, the scientific material is referred to an arbitrator for weighting, and the editorial committee has the final decision in this regard. Scientific works are evaluated on the special forms prepared by the editorial committee. The evaluation results are confidential, and the journal's editorial committee is committed to their confidentiality and Nondisclosure.

Steps and Conditions for Publishing in the Journal

Preliminary Arbitration Criteria for Acceptance of Publication in the Journal

1. It is characterized by scientific methodology and modernity in subject and presentation.
2. Keeping in mind the correctness of the language and validity of the research method.
3. The number of research pages should not exceed 20 pages.

Publication Steps :

Sending the abstract of the scientific paper to be published in the name of the editor-in-chief of the journal by e-mail according to the forms prepared on the journal’s website, accompanied by the researcher’s acknowledgment form, noting that the research has not been previously published in any journal, or submitting it to any other party before submitting it to the journal.

1. The abstract is discussed in the periodic meeting of the editorial committee of the journal to determine the scientific competence of the research and then assign its topic to the competent member of the committee to express an initial opinion regarding the validity of its topic for publication or not.
2. The researcher shall be notified of receiving the research abstract within a period not exceeding two weeks.
3. When the abstract of the paper is accepted, the researcher is asked to send the entire research according to the terms and rules of publication published on the journal's website.
4. The editorial committee of the journal, in its periodic meeting, conducts the initial examination of the research formats and conformity with the conditions of publication in the journal. If it conforms to the conditions and rules of publication, the research is assigned to the competent member of the journal's editorial committee for preliminary evaluation.
5. The paper is passed on a plagiarism checker program to monitor and prevent scientific citation in writing scientific papers submitted to the journal's editorial committee.
6. Sending the research to the arbitrators for final arbitration, where the professors of the specialty who attest to them competence and integrity evaluate the scientific works submitted for publication in the journal. In this direction, the evaluator is committed to confidentiality and objectivity in the evaluation, following the scientific methods of evaluation. The editorial committee of the journal is also committed to complete confidentiality in the evaluation of the arbitrators.
7. Notify the researcher via e-mail of the final arbitration result.
8. The researcher makes amendments or notes, if any, based on the arbitrator's decision before the final publication of the research.
9. Publish the research in the next issue of the journal.