Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study aims to reveal the essence a group of health sciences academics’ experience in producing scholarly publications. In this study conducted with the qualitative phenomenological approach, a set of predetermined criteria were used to select the participants for inclusion in the study group. Thus, the criterion-based sampling method, one of the purposive sampling methods, was used in this study. A semi-structured interview form prepared by the researchers was used as a data collection tool. In addition, in-depth interviews were conducted with the participants. Upon observing data saturation, the data collection process was ended. 12 academics were included in this study. After the interview records were transcribed by the researchers, they were all transferred to the MAXQDA 2022 program, through which coding and thematic analyses were performed. Regarding the scholarly publication process, the themes titled as "authoring", "peer reviewing", "editing",n"publication ethics", "dissatisfaction," and "suggestions" emerged in the analysis of the data. The results obtained in this research render academics’ experiences in the publication processes visible. Thus, it enables publication integrity assessment by focusing on the three important agents of the scholarly publication process: the author, reviewer, and the editor. Reviewing the related literature revealed very few studies on publication processes of health sciences academics’. Discussing and revealing the experiences of academics related to the publication process is necessary to increase the transparency and quality of this process. Thus, this study can serve as a guide for future studies.
Abukan et al. (Wed,) studied this question.