Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Model

IJAPGR uses double-blind peer review: reviewers are not told the authors' identities, and authors are not told the reviewers' identities. Manuscripts sent for external review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewer reports are not published.

1. Initial editorial assessment

The editor first checks each submission for relevance to the journal's Aims and Scope, scientific presentation, completeness and compliance with the Author Guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned without external review.

2. Anonymisation

To keep the review anonymous, authors must remove names, affiliations, acknowledgements and other identifying details from the manuscript file. Author details are entered in the submission form and on a separate title page, which reviewers do not see.

3. External review

Reviewers assess originality, methodological quality, reliability of the results, interpretation, ethical considerations and relevance to pharmaceutical science, and recommend acceptance, revision or rejection.

4. Editorial decision

The editor makes the decision (accept, minor revision, major revision or reject) taking account of the reviewers' reports. Authors asked to revise should return the revised manuscript with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments; revised manuscripts may be sent back to the reviewers. Payment of the publication charge plays no part in editorial decisions.

Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential, must not share them or use unpublished information for their own purposes, and must not upload manuscripts to public AI tools.

Conflicts of interest

Editors and reviewers must declare any competing interest and decline to handle a manuscript they cannot assess impartially. A manuscript submitted by an editor or editorial board member is handled by another editor, and the submitting editor has no access to its review or decision.

Appeals

Authors who believe a decision was based on a factual error or a misunderstanding may appeal by writing to the editorial office at pharmajournals@gmail.com, explaining the grounds. Appeals are considered by an editor who was not involved in the original decision.