Code of Publishing Ethics

Editorial Board

Authors and Authors Responsibilities

Peer-review Process

Publication Ethics

Copyright and Licensing


Ownership and Publisher


Publishing Schedule

Name of Journal

Publisher Principles: Codes of Conduct and Ethical Guidelines


Editorial Board

The Journal's Editorial Board and their affiliations & contact information are available at the journal page menu titled: "Editorial Board"


Authors and Authors Responsibilities

The corresponding author takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, and gathering conflict of interest statements, are properly completed. The corresponding author should respond to editorial queries throughout the submission and peer review process in a timely manner, and should cooperate with any requests from the journal after publication.

Daneshvar Medicine: Basic and Clinical Research Journal does not allow adding authors or changing the first or the corresponding authors after the final acceptance of the article. If any author wishes to be removed from the byline, he or she should submit a letter signed by the author, as well as all other authors, indicating his or her wish to be deleted from the list of authors. Any change in the name order in the byline requires a letter signed by all authors indicting agreement with the same.

Originality of Publication

Manuscripts submitted to journal must be original and not published or submitted for publication elsewhere.


Peer Review Policy

Journal are committed to apply double-blind peer review process, based on the COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices and ICMJE's Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.

Peer Review Process

The decision to publish a paper is based on an editorial assessment and peer review. Initially all papers are assessed internally by an editorial committee consisting of 2 or more members of the editorial board primarily based on Editor-in-Chief Selection & decision. The prime purpose is to decide about fast rejection or the decision to send the manuscript to external review. Papers which their topics are not relevant to the journal aim & scope or they did not meet basic journal standards and requirements will be rejected at this stage to avoid delays to authors who may wish to seek publication elsewhere. Occasionally a paper will be returned to the author with requests for revisions in order to assist the editors in deciding whether or not send it out for review. Authors can expect a decision from this stage of the review process within 1–2 weeks of submission. All such papers will undergo a double blind peer review by two or more reviewers, under supervision of the Editor-in-Chief. We take every reasonable step to ensure author identity is concealed during the review process but it is up to authors to ensure that their details of prior publications etc. do not reveal their identity. Authors who reveal their identity in the manuscript will be deemed to have declined anonymity and the review will be single blind (i.e. authors do not know reviewers' identities). We aim to complete the review process within 4-8 weeks of the decision to review although occasionally delays do happen and authors should allow at least 8 weeks from submissions before contacting the journal. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to the final decision regarding acceptance.

Reviewers Role

A reviewer should immediately decline to review an article submitted if he/she feels that the article is technically unqualified or if the timely review cannot be done by him/her or if the article has a conflict of interest. Reviewers being the base of the whole quality process should ensure that the articles published should be of high quality and original work. He may inform the editor if he finds the article submitted to him for review is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge.

In general, the following items may be checked in a review :

Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to author guidelines
Purpose and Objective of the article
Introduction given and the conclusion/ suggestions provided
References provided to substantiate the content
Grammar, punctuation and spelling
Plagiarism issues
Suitability of the article to the need

A reviewer’s comments decide the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript as a major element in a peer review process. All our reviewers are requested to go through the articles submitted to them for review in details and give the review comments without any bias, conflict of interests which finally will be observed & decided by journal Editor-in-Chief.

Guidance for Peer Reviewers

If we invite you to review an article, please do not discuss it even with a colleague. When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should fill the journal’s reviewing form. You should try to respond to every peer review invitation you receive. If you feel the paper is outside your area of expertise or you are unable to devote the necessary time, please let the editorial office know as soon as possible so that they can invite an alternative reviewer – it as at this stage you may like to nominate an appropriately qualified colleague. And please remember, if an author's manuscript is sitting with reviewers who have not responded to the peer-review request, the author will not get a timely decision. Please read the Aims and Scope and the Author Instruction with care. Consideration should be given to whether the paper is suitable for the journal it is submitted to. The journals' aims and scope is available on “Journal Information” menu and pages. Reviewers need to make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief on deciding the manuscript. Your report must contain your detailed answers on the journal questions in the reviewing form. If you believe the paper needs revisions to be made before it is acceptable, please make suggestions on how to improve the paper. Likewise, if you feel that a paper is not good enough and has no real prospects of being improved sufficiently to be published you should recommend rejection.

You should also:

Write clearly and avoid complex or unusual words, number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments. If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are. Treat the author’s work the way you would like your own to be treated.

Conflict of Interest in Reviewing Process

If there’s a significant conflict of interest, you should reveal this to the editor
If the conflict of interest causes a large positive or negative bias, then it is better to decline the review request. Avoid personal judgment and criticism at all times – judge the article. This is more likely to be well received by the author and lead to better work by them. Every editor will appreciate honesty about conflicts of interest, even if they then have to look for a replacement reviewer.


Publication ethics


COPE’s Guidelines & Flowcharts

Daneshvar Medicine: Basic and Clinical Research Journal is committed to follow guidelines and flowcharts of Committee on Publication Ethics in its reviewing and publishing process and issues. For more information, please click here.


National Ethics Committee Approval Code

Based on Iran Ministry of Health & Medical Education regulation & rules, all submitted manuscript to the journals should be registered within Iran National Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research earlier & achieved the Ethics Committee Approval Code which should be submitted along with manuscript & should be mentioned in the last part of manuscript material & methods section. Each Ethics Committee Approval Code will be verified online at Iran National Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research website available at:


Copyright and Access

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. All journal papers are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source.


Archiving Policy

The journal is now archiving electronically at


Ownership and management

Daneshvar Medicine: Basic and Clinical Research owned & supported fully by Shahed University.

Please refer to this page for information on Financial Policies.



The journal’s Web site is avialable at: requiered ethical and professional standards are available at the journal website.


Publishing schedule
The Journal published in a Bimonthly basis.

Name of Journal & Abbreviation
The journal title is Daneshvar Medicine: Basic and Clinical Research Journal. The journal acronyms is Daneshvar Med.