Editor-in-Chief
Prof. Rajeev Taliyan
Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology & Science (BITS), Pilani, Rajasthan, India
Peer Review Policy
Publication decisions for submitted manuscripts are based on both editorial assessment and peer review. Following submission, each manuscript is preliminarily reviewed by at least two members of the editorial team to determine its suitability for external review. This initial stage is intended to provide authors with a timely decision when a manuscript is clearly unsuitable for further consideration.
Editorials and Letters to the Editor may occasionally be accepted without external review. Most manuscripts, however, are either declined during the initial assessment or sent for peer review. Submissions that lack sufficient novelty or relevance may be rejected at this stage to avoid unnecessary delays. In some cases, authors may be asked to revise their manuscripts before a decision on peer review is made. An initial decision is generally provided within one to two weeks of submission.
Manuscripts proceeding to peer review are evaluated by a panel of experts through a double-blind review process involving at least two independent reviewers under the supervision of the Editor-in-Chief. The journal aims to complete peer review within 6-8 weeks of the review decision, although delays may occasionally occur. Authors are advised to allow up to 6 weeks from submission before contacting the editorial office. The Editor-in-Chief holds final authority over all acceptance and rejection decisions. Upon acceptance, manuscripts are published online within 2-3 weeks. The peer review process adheres to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), with additional guidance provided for reviewers.
Role of Reviewers
Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal and must keep their identities and all manuscript details strictly confidential under the double-blind review process. Reviewers should decline invitations if the manuscript is outside their expertise, if they cannot complete the review on time, or if any conflict of interest exists. Manuscripts must not be shared or transferred to others without prior editorial approval.
Reviewers are expected to assess the originality, scientific rigor, relevance, and overall quality of submissions, including adherence to author guidelines, clarity of objectives, organization, references, language quality, and absence of plagiarism. If they become aware of duplicate submission elsewhere, they should inform the editor.
Reviewer recommendations to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript are important in guiding editorial decisions. Constructive, fair, and objective feedback is strongly encouraged.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors, including the Editor-in-Chief, hold full responsibility and authority for decisions to accept or reject manuscripts. Decisions should be fair, unbiased, and based solely on the manuscript’s originality, significance, clarity, scientific quality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
Editors should avoid conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, editorial staff, or board members. Decisions should not be based on suspicion alone; any allegation of misconduct must be supported by evidence and investigated appropriately, whether the manuscript is published or under review.
Editors should maintain reviewer anonymity, respect previous editorial decisions unless there is a valid reason for reconsideration, and avoid reversing decisions without serious justification. Manuscripts should only be accepted when they meet the journal’s quality standards and ethical requirements.
Editors are also responsible for ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record by issuing corrections or errata when necessary, considering funding disclosures, and continuously improving the quality of the journal for both authors and readers.
Peer Review Policy for Editors and Editorial Board Submissions
Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, or editorial board members are handled independently to avoid conflicts of interest. The submitting editor or board member will have no involvement in the review or decision-making process.
The manuscript will be managed by an independent editor and undergo the journal’s standard double-blind peer review by at least two external reviewers. Final decisions are based solely on academic merit, quality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
Confidentiality
Confidentiality is fundamental to the publication process. Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and share information only with individuals directly involved in editorial evaluation, peer review, and publication. Manuscript details must not be disclosed or discussed publicly before acceptance and publication.
Editors are responsible for safeguarding the identities and comments of authors and reviewers in accordance with journal policy. Reviewer comments or identities will not be disclosed without permission, except where an open peer review system is in place. Anonymous reviewer identities will remain confidential unless written consent is provided.
Confidentiality may only be breached in cases involving suspected misconduct, fraud, or ethical concerns, and affected parties should be informed when appropriate. Editors must not use confidential information for personal benefit and will take necessary action to address any breach of confidentiality.