Responsibility of the Reviewer (s)

Peer review and reviewers are crucial to the publishing process, as they validate an author’s research to confirm its suitability for publication. The Journal of Pharmaceutical Technology, Research and Management is a double-blind, peer-reviewed journal where the editor(s) mediate between the reviewer(s) and corresponding author(s). The reviewer(s) are subject experts assigned by the editor(s) to assess the quality, significance, and scientific contribution of the submitted manuscript. The review process should be completed within the defined time frame without any bias. If a review cannot be completed within the given time, you may contact the editor(s) to request an extension. Your expert comments should be submitted through the online process. Please ensure that all required documents (text material, figures, rough data, etc.) are available for your review. If anything is missing, please contact the editor(s) directly. You can learn more about reviewer responsibilities by downloading the ethical guidelines:

https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers-cope.pdf

Instructions for Peer Review

The peer review of manuscripts is classified into three screening stages. During the screening, the reviewer must focus on the originality and novelty of the manuscript. The article should exhibit scientific soundness, industrial significance and good quality presentation. For more details about the peer review policy:

First Stage Screening

• Submitted papers must correspond to one of the topics of the journal
• Incomplete structure
• Plagiarism and self-plagiarism check using Turnitin software
• Low-quality tables or figures
• Spelling or grammar errors
• The corresponding author declare that they have obtained the consent of all co-authors before including their names in the paper

Second Stage Screening

• The paper will be reviewed following the journal’s peer review policy.
• Revisions may be requested during the review process.
• A second peer review may be requested after major/minor revision.
• The final decision of acceptance or rejection is made by the editor

Final/Third Stage Screening

The editor will confirm that publication ethics & guidelines have been followed before making the final decision.

Decisions

• Accepted : The paper is accepted and does not need further modification.
• Accept with Minor Revisions : The paper will be accepted after minor revisions. In such cases, the revised paper will be reviewed by the original reviewers, or the editor may make the final decision.
• Re-evaluate with Major Revisions : The paper will be sent to the original reviewers for re-evaluation unless they opt out.
• Rejected : The paper will not be accepted due to major deficiencies and is not recommended for resubmission.

Revisions

Authors must revise their papers within the allowed time frame. Manuscripts requiring major revisions will be sent to the original reviewers for a second-round review. Manuscripts with minor revisions will typically be reviewed by the editor. The final decision will be made by the editor after a careful and unbiased assessment.

Changes to Authorship

No changes to authorship are permissible after final submission on the manuscript submission system.