Peer Review Process

The International Journal of Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences (IJCPS) is committed to publishing high-quality, original, and ethically conducted research through a rigorous, fair, and transparent double-blind peer review process. In this system, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process to ensure impartial evaluation.

Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscript through the e-mail at pharmaresearchlibrary@gmail.com
The manuscript should comply with the journal's formatting and author guidelines.

1. Initial Editorial Assessment
   Upon submission, the Editorial Office conducts a preliminary screening to determine whether the manuscript:

• Falls within the aims and scope of the journal.
• Complies with the journal's formatting and submission guidelines.
• Meets ethical requirements, including approval from relevant ethics committees where applicable.
• Is free from plagiarism or significant similarity using plagiarism detection software.

Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected without external review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review
   Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise. The journal follows a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that neither the reviewers nor the authors know each other's identities during the evaluation.

3. Reviewer Evaluation
   Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

• Originality and novelty of the research.
• Scientific validity and methodological rigor.
• Significance and contribution to the field.
• Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation.
• Ethical compliance.
• Clarity, organization, and quality of presentation.
• Adequacy of references and literature review.

Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

4. Editorial Decision
   The Editor-in-Chief or the assigned Handling Editor carefully considers the reviewers' comments before making a final decision. If reviewer opinions differ substantially, the manuscript may be sent to an additional independent reviewer for further evaluation. The editorial decision is based on the scientific quality and recommendations received rather than reviewer voting alone.

5. Revision Process
   Authors receiving a revision request should submit:

• A revised manuscript with tracked or highlighted changes (if requested).
• A detailed point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further assessment when necessary.

6. Final Acceptance
   Once the manuscript satisfactorily addresses all reviewer and editorial comments, the Editor issues a final acceptance decision. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, typesetting, and final publication.

7. Confidentiality
   All manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose or use unpublished information obtained during the peer review process for personal or professional advantage.

8. Conflict of Interest
   Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence their assessment. Individuals with conflicts of interest will not participate in the review or editorial decision-making process.

9. Appeals
   Authors who believe a manuscript has been unfairly rejected may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, providing a clear scientific justification. Appeals are reviewed independently, and the Editor's decision following the appeal is considered final.

10. Ethical Standards
    It adheres to internationally accepted publication ethics and follows the recommendations of recognized publishing ethics organizations to maintain integrity, transparency, fairness, and quality throughout the peer review process.