Reviewers responsibilities:

Peer reviewers are external experts chosen by editors (sometimes are suggested by the authors, without obligation on editor-in-chief to use them) to provide written opinions, with the aim of improving the study.

The duties of the reviewers include:

1. The duty of confidentiality in the assessment of a manuscript must be maintained by expert reviewers, and this extends to reviewers’ colleagues who may be asked (with the editor’s permission) to give opinions on specific sections.
2. The submitted manuscript should not be retained or copied.
3. Reviewers and editor-in-chief should not make any use of the data, arguments, or interpretations unless they have the authors’ permission.
4. Reviewers should provide speedy, accurate, courteous, unbiased, and justifiable reports.
5. If reviewers suspect misconduct, they should write in confidence to the editor.
6. Journal of Veterinary Anatomy should publish accurate descriptions of their peer review, selection, and appeals processes.
7. Journal of Veterinary Anatomy should also provide regular audits of its acceptance rates and publication times.

N.B.

1. Previous publication of an abstract during the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made at the time of submission.
2. Re-publication of a paper in another language is acceptable, provided that there is full and prominent disclosure of its original source at the time of submission. 

Editor-in-Chief responsibilities:

Editor-in-chief provides direction for the journal and builds a strong management team.

He must consider and balance the interests of many constituents, including readers, authors, staff, owners, editorial board members, advertisers and the media.

The editor-in-chief is responsible for:

1. The decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.
2. Studies that challenge previous work published in the journal should be given an especially sympathetic hearing from the editor.
3. Studies reporting negative results should not be excluded.
4. All original studies should be peer-reviewed before publication, taking into full account possible bias due to related or conflicting interests

1. The editor-in-chief must treat all submitted papers as confidential.
2. When a published paper is subsequently found to contain major flaws, the editor-in-chief must accept responsibility for correcting the record prominently and promptly.
3. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by advertising revenue or reprint potential: editorial and advertising administration must be clearly separated.
4. Advertisements that mislead must be refused, and editors must be willing to publish criticisms, according to the same criteria used for material in the rest of the journal.
5. The Journal is following COPE instructions.