Peer Review policy

 Peer Review
All submissions fulfilling the journal’s requirements (regarding the field, format, the English language, and scientific quality and significance) will be reviewed anonymously by at least three or more national and international referees expert in the field. The corresponding author could also suggest potential reviewers to the journal at the time of submission. However, the editorial board reserves the right to select or refuse to use the suggested potential reviewers.

Information for reviewers

  This journal uses double-blind review. Reviewers must login to our website to enter their peer review. For the first time, they will need to create new account. They should log in here and proceed by checking for an account or registering a new account.

  Reviewers are experts chosen by editor in chief and/or associated editors. They are invited to provide written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for the journal. Reviews will be expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. Reviewers will evaluate all sections of manuscript carefully, such as major strengths and weaknesses of study design and methodology, quality of the author's interpretation of the data, ethical issues regards to human and animal studies as well as plagiarism detection. However, reviewers kindly provide the author and editor with useful suggestion for improvement of the manuscript. The review should provide the editor the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) or rejection of the manuscript.

  The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It should not be retained or copied. Also, reviewers are not allowed sharing the manuscript with any person without the formal permission of the editor. Reviewers and editorial board are not allowed to use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors' specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the article.

  If reviewers suspect misconduct, they should notify the editor in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties unless officially notified by the journal that they may do so.

 

  Reviewers can download this highly-recommended editorial from Plos.org (Ten Simple Rules for Reviewers ). (Bourne PE, Korngreen A (2006) Ten Simple Rules for Reviewers. PLoS Comput Biol 2(9): e110)

 


View: 1910 Time(s)   |   Print: 127 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)

© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Research

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb