About the Journal
Focus and Scope
The content of the Journal of Dentistry and Allied Science (JDAS) is scholarly research articles including original research articles, review articles and case reports. Journal of Dentistry and Allied Science is a peer-reviewed journal and we published our article by maintaining the quality of academic standard. The aim of the journal is to contributing development of health science in both research and clinical field.
University Dental College, a project of Dental & Medical Community Services and Research Foundation, is a prestigious institution for dental education and health services in Bangladesh. Since commencement in 1995, the institution has been managed and run by highly qualified and skilled faculty members who take imparting of knowledge and skills more as a mission than a profession. The high standard of teaching has already attracted many students to this institution and the management takes special care to ensure that the highest quality is maintained at any cost. The authority always strives to upgrade the teaching methods employed. The year-round presence of visiting and honorary faculty members amply exemplifies the efforts. The courses offered by the College are compatible with those offered by international institutions.
The Peer Review Process
UDC Journals employs a three-stage review process – editorial office, external review and editors’ decision.The first stage of the review process takes place in the editorial office. On submission, a manuscript is reviewed to ensure that it meets the minimum requirements of the journal before it is sent to external reviewers. At this stage, the manuscript is reviewed for the following.
- Possible plagiarism: The manuscript is evaluated to compare the level of similarity with other published works. SSG Journals uses Turnitin plagiarism detection system to achieve this goal. Manuscripts that have high level of similarity (>20%) with other works (including the author(s) previous works) are rejected at this stage. Authors are provided with the similarity report together with the decision to reject the manuscript.
- Scope: After a manuscript has undergone similarity check and the level of similarity is judged to be appropriate, the content of the manuscript is checked to ensure that it fits within the scope of the journal selected by the author(s). In situations where the content of the manuscript does not fit the scope of the journal, the author’s consent is sought for the manuscript to be transferred to a more suitable journal. A transferred manuscript does not automatically translate to an accepted manuscript in the receiving journal. The manuscript still undergoes the usual peer review and may be accepted or reject if it is not suitable.
- Recent references: Academic Journals encourage authors to cite more recent articles. Preferably, considerable number of the cited articles should be works that were published within the last five years. This is especially important for articles submitted to journals in the life sciences.
- English Language: Academic Journals currently publishes full text of articles only in English language.
- Manuscripts are checked for the structure, organization, correctness and clarity of the language as it adheres to the journal’s Instructions for Authors. The editorial office usually makes correction to minor grammatical errors in such a manner that it does not alter the manuscript. However, in situations where language is substantially difficult to comprehend, the manuscript is returned to the author to improve clarity of the language.
Manuscripts that fails in this first stage of the review process are returned to the author(s) for modification and resubmission. This first stage of the review is very important as it enables the author(s) improve the manuscript at an early stage. This first stage of the manuscript review is usually completed within 3-5 days.
Once a manuscript successfully completes the editorial office review process, it proceeds to the second stage. The second stage of the review process employs the double-blind review system. Three external reviewers are selected from our database, editorial board of the journal or other sources. These reviewers have expert knowledge of the subject area of the manuscript. The reviewers are invited to review the manuscript by sending them the abstract of the manuscript. Upon acceptance to review the manuscript, the full text of the manuscript is sent to the reviewers after the author(s) have been concealed.
Reviewers are required to evaluate the manuscripts and provide useful comments to enable the author(s) improve the quality of the manuscript. Reviewers also score the manuscript in terms of originality, contribution to the field, technical quality, and clarity of presentation and depth of research. Finally, reviewers make one of the following suggestion about the manuscript;
- Requires minor corrections. • Requires moderate revision. • Requires major revision. • Not suitable for further processing. In this case, the reviewer provides specific reason(s) why the manuscript not be further processed.
It should be noted that though a reviewer may give a positive report on a particular manuscript, if another reviewer raises concerns that may fundamentally undermine the study and results the manuscript may be rejected.
Upon receipt of the reviewers’ comments, the editorial office reviews the comment. All reviewers’ comments are thereafter sent to the author(s). The reviewers’ identities are concealed from the author(s). The total time taken to complete the second stage of the manuscript review dependent on the availability of the reviewers. However, it is usually completed between 2-3 weeks.
Using the reviewers’ comments, author(s) make corrections to the manuscript and submits a revised manuscript. Upon receipt of the revised submission, the manuscript undergoes the third and final stage of the review process. The original manuscript, the revised manuscript and all the reviewers’ comments are sent to an editor of the journal. The editor reviews the manuscript and makes one the following decisions.
- Accept as it is. • Accept with minor correction. • Requires major corrections. • Send revised manuscript for review again. • Reject.
Manuscripts that are accepted as it is are scheduled for publication. Manuscripts that require corrections (either minor or major) are sent to the author(s) to affect the corrections suggested by the editor. After effecting the corrections, the editor reviews the manuscripts again before the manuscripts are accepted for publication. In some cases, the editor may require authors to make corrections a second time. In other cases, the editor may request for the revised manuscripts with (or without) the additional corrections to be sent to a specific reviewer who had earlier reviewed the manuscript before the manuscript can be accepted for publication.
All articles of our journal are reviewed by external members and researchers all over the country relevant to submitted article in a randomized way. After submission, all articles are sent to the reviewers. The members of the editorial board are usually not the first choice as reviewers. They send their receipt within 10 days. They then send the reviewed articles with their comments back to the editors. The reviewed articles are then prepared for print. It usually takes 1-2 months in the whole process. Detailed process:
- Submission of Paper- The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is usually by email or hard copy by post.
- Editorial Office Assessment- The journal checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to ensure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point. The editorial office checks the article for Plagiarism by Plagiarism Detector software (V.4) and in certain cases online-based software- Grammerly or Duply checker. It usually takes 5 working days.
- Executive Editor (EE) Assigns an Assistant Editor (AE)- Assistant Editor (AE) Invite reviewer. The editor sends the file to an external reviewer - Double Blinded Peer Review Process which usually takes 5 working days
- Invitation to Reviewers-The AE sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained – commonly two persons. It usually takes 5 working days.
- Response to Invitations- Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline within 5 working days.
- Review is Conducted- Reviewer reviews the paper as per journal guideline. He/ She fill up reviewer electronic form. At this stage reviewer send it back to AE with his comments within 10-15 working days.
- Journal Evaluates the Reviews-The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision within 5 working days.
- The Decision is communicated-The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments, regarding the acceptance or declination of the article or for necessary correction. If accepted paper sends to production. If rejected paper is sent to the Authors.
Publication Frequency
The Journal of Dentistry and Allied Science (JDAS)is published twice in a year (January and July)two issues (one volume) each year.
Open Access Policy
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.
Article Processing Fees
Our journal is free to everyone. Full text of all the contents is always available. There is no article processing charges (APCs) or submission charges. Our readers can copy, distribute, and use their attributed research for non-commercial purpose free of charge. Our journal retains copyright of the articles through a Creative Commons attribution license (CC-BY 4.0).
Source of Support
The University Dental College, Dhaka-1217 bears all the costs of publication of the journal.
Publisher
