Clinics of Surgery (ISSN 2638-1451) follows a structured peer-review process designed to ensure the quality, originality, scientific integrity, and relevance of manuscripts submitted for publication.
The journal welcomes original research, reviews, case reports, case series, clinical images, technical notes, short communications, and other scholarly contributions within the scope of surgery and related clinical disciplines.
Manuscripts are submitted through the journal's designated submission system. Authors are required to prepare their manuscripts according to the Author Guidelines and provide all required declarations, ethical information, author details, figures, tables, and supporting documents.
Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee acceptance or publication.
After submission, the editorial office conducts an initial screening to determine whether the manuscript:
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or may be declined without external peer review.
Manuscripts may be screened using appropriate similarity-detection tools as part of the editorial process.
Where substantial inappropriate overlap, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other publication concerns are identified, the manuscript may be returned, rejected, or investigated in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.
A similarity score alone does not determine the editorial decision; the nature and context of the identified overlap are considered.
Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assessed by an editor for scientific relevance, originality, methodological quality, clarity, and suitability for the journal.
The editor determines whether the manuscript should proceed to external peer review.
Manuscripts considered suitable for review are evaluated by qualified reviewers with relevant expertise.
Clinics of Surgery generally follows a single-anonymized peer-review model.
Reviewers are asked to evaluate, as appropriate:
Reviewers provide comments and recommendations to assist the editor in reaching a publication decision.
Following peer review, the editor may make one of the following decisions:
The editorial decision is based on the overall assessment of the manuscript, reviewer comments, scientific quality, relevance, and the journal's editorial standards.
A manuscript may be rejected even when individual reviewer comments are favourable if the editor determines that it does not meet the journal's publication criteria.