Peer Review Procedure
The purpose of peer review is to improve the quality of the manuscript under review, and of the material that is eventually published. Conscientious peer review is a time consuming task but is essential to assure the quality of articles published by The Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Medicinal Research (TJOPAM). TJOAPM employs a rigorous peer review system and all submitted manuscripts undergo a peer review process before publication.
The peer review process is an important aspect of the publication process of an article. It enables authors to improve their manuscripts and aids editors in making decision on manuscripts. The Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Medicinal Research operates a single-blind review process in which reviewers know the identity of authors but the identities of the authors are hidden from the reviewers.
TJOPAM employs a three-stage review process – Initial assessment by Editors, expert review and editors’ decision.
In the first stage, all submission will be initially assessed by the editor to ensure that it meets the minimum requirements of the journal before it is sent to independent expert reviewers. At the first stage, the manuscript is reviewed for the following:
- Possible plagiarism: The manuscript is evaluated to compare the level of similarity with other published works. Manuscripts that have high level of similarity with other works (including the author(s) previous works) are rejected at this stage.
- 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.
- English Language:TJOPAM currently publishes full text of articles only in English language.
- Manuscript Organisation: 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) to improve the manuscript at an early stage. The first stage of the manuscript review is usually completed within a week.
Once a manuscript successfully completes the first stage review process, it proceeds to the second stage.
In the second stage, manuscript deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewer to assess the scientific quality of the paper. We use a wide range of sources to identify potential reviewers, including the editorial board, personal knowledge, author suggestions, and bibliographic databases. These reviewers have expert knowledge of the subject area of the manuscript. The reviewers are invited to review the manuscript by sending them review request that contain the information about the abstract of the manuscript. Upon acceptance to review the request, the full text of the manuscript is accessible automatically to the reviewers after they logged in TJOPAM. Reviewers are required to evaluate the manuscripts and provide useful comments in Reviewer feedback form to enable the author(s) to improve the quality of the manuscript. Upon receipt of the reviewers’ comments, the assigned editor reviews the comment. If the two reviewers’ comment have significantly different/or contradictory opinions about the same manuscripts, then the manuscript is re-sent to a third reviewer. Reviewers’ evaluations play a major role in our decision as to whether to accept/revise/reject the submitted manuscript. 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 one to two weeks.
In the third stage, based on receipt of reviewer comments, the Editor is sole responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance, revision or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final. Manuscripts that are accepted as it is are send for copy editing and then transfer to schedule for publication. Manuscript that is rejected are sent back to author with reviewer comments. After rejection, author(s) are free to submit their manuscript in other journal without taking any consent from TJOPAM. Manuscripts that require corrections are sent to the author(s) to affect the corrections suggested by reviewers and editors. Upon receipt of the revised submission, the manuscript again undergoes the peer review process as per the second stage. In most cases, the editor may send the revised manuscripts with (or without) the additional corrections to a specific reviewer who had earlier reviewed the manuscript. Upon the receipt of the reviewers’ comments, editor makes one the following decision based on the original manuscript, the revised manuscript and all the reviewers’ comments:
Manuscripts that are accepted as it is are send for copy editing and then transfer to schedule for publication. Manuscript that is rejected are sent back to author with reviewer comments. After rejection, author(s) are free to submit their manuscript in other journal without taking any consent from TJOPAM. Manuscripts that again require corrections are sent to the author(s) to affect the corrections suggested by the editor. After effecting the corrections, the editor reviews the revised manuscripts and make final decision. In some cases, the editor may send the second revised manuscripts with (or without) the additional corrections to a specific reviewer who had earlier reviewed the manuscript.
Essential Note: We strive to ensure that peer review is fair, unbiased and timely. Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript for publication are based on the manuscript’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal. Editors are not involved in decisions about papers which they have written themselves or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures, with peer review handled independently of the relevant editor and their research groups.