Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The International Journal of Current Research in Pharmacy (IJCRP) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethical external peer-review process to evaluate the scientific quality, originality, validity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.
Peer review is an essential component of the journal's editorial process. The objective is to provide authors with constructive scientific feedback and to assist editors in making fair and informed publication decisions.
- Editorial Screening
All manuscripts submitted to IJCRP first undergo an initial editorial screening to determine whether they:
- Fall within the scope of the journal.
- Meet the basic manuscript requirements.
- Demonstrate sufficient scientific and scholarly quality.
- Comply with applicable ethical and publication requirements.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to authors or rejected before external peer review.
- Similarity and Research Integrity Check
Before or during editorial assessment, manuscripts may undergo similarity screening and research-integrity checks.
The editorial team evaluates potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text reuse, data concerns, authorship issues, and other forms of publication misconduct where applicable.
A similarity percentage alone is not used as the sole basis for an editorial decision.
- Selectionof Reviewers
Manuscripts considered suitable for review are assigned to qualified and independent external reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.
Reviewers are selected based on:
- Relevant subject expertise
- Research experience
- Academic or professional qualifications
- Independence from the authors
- Absence of significant conflicts of interest
- Ability to provide an objective and timely review
Where possible, reviewers should not be selected from the same institution as the authors or from relationships that could compromise independent assessment.
- Peer-Review Model
IJCRP may use an anonymized peer-review process, in which reviewer and author identities are protected during the review process.
The specific review model applicable to a manuscript may depend on the article type and editorial requirements.
The journal's primary research articles are evaluated through external peer review before a final publication decision is made.
- Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
- Maintain confidentiality of the manuscript.
- Provide objective, constructive, and scientifically supported comments.
- Evaluate the manuscript independently.
- Identify significant methodological or scientific concerns.
- Identify relevant missing literature where appropriate.
- Assess the validity of the conclusions.
- Disclose any potential conflict of interest.
- Inform the editor if they are unable to provide an impartial review.
- Avoid using unpublished information from the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.
- Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe whenever possible.
Reviewers should not communicate directly with authors about the manuscript unless authorized by the journal.
- Reviewer Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers may be asked to evaluate the following aspects:
Scientific Quality
- Scientific validity
- Research design
- Methodology
- Data quality
- Statistical analysis where applicable
Originality
- Novelty of the research
- Original contribution
- Advancement of existing knowledge
Presentation
- Organization and clarity
- Quality of tables and figures
- Appropriate interpretation of results
- Adequacy of references
Ethical Compliance
- Ethical approval where required
- Appropriate participant or animal protections
- Research integrity
- Conflict-of-interest disclosure
Overall Contribution
- Relevance to pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences
- Significance of the findings
- Potential contribution to the scientific community
- Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the responsible editor after considering the reviewer reports and the overall quality of the manuscript.
- Multiple Reviewers
Where appropriate, a manuscript may be evaluated by two or more independent reviewers.
If reviewer recommendations substantially differ, the editor may:
- Seek an additional independent review.
- Request clarification from the existing reviewers.
- Evaluate the manuscript independently.
- Make a decision based on the available evidence and editorial assessment.
The number of reviewers may vary according to the article type, subject matter, and editorial requirements.
- Revision Process
When revision is requested, authors should provide:
- A revised manuscript.
- A detailed point-by-point response to reviewer comments.
- Clear explanations for comments that have not been adopted.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further assessment or evaluated by additional reviewers when necessary.
- Editorial Decision
The editor considers:
- Reviewer reports
- Scientific quality
- Originality
- Methodological soundness
- Ethical compliance
- Author responses
- Revisions made to the manuscript
- Overall suitability for publication
The editor may accept, request further revision, or reject the manuscript.
The journal does not guarantee acceptance based on the number of favorable reviewer recommendations.
- Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are made independently on the basis of the scientific and scholarly merits of the manuscript.
Decisions are not influenced by:
- Author nationality
- Gender
- Religion
- Institutional prestige
- Personal relationships
- Commercial interests
- Political considerations
- Ability to pay publication charges
If an editor has a conflict of interest with a manuscript, the manuscript should be assigned to an appropriate independent editor.
- Reviewer Confidentiality
Manuscripts submitted to IJCRP are treated as confidential documents.
Reviewers must not:
- Share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals.
- Distribute unpublished material.
- Use unpublished information for personal benefit.
- Discuss the manuscript outside the review process.
The journal expects all participants in peer review to respect confidentiality.
- Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.
Conflicts may include:
- Personal relationships
- Institutional relationships
- Professional collaboration
- Financial interests
- Direct competition
- Academic disputes
- Other circumstances that could compromise objectivity
The editor may appoint another reviewer when a significant conflict exists.
- Reviewer Misconduct
The journal takes reviewer misconduct seriously.
Concerns involving:
- Breach of confidentiality
- Biased or inappropriate reviews
- Undisclosed conflicts of interest
- Manipulation of peer review
- Misuse of unpublished information
may be investigated by the editorial team and appropriate action may be taken.
- Appeals
Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that:
- A significant factual error occurred.
- The manuscript was misunderstood in a material way.
- Relevant information was not considered.
- There was a serious procedural or ethical issue.
Appeals should provide a clear and evidence-based explanation.
An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
- Peer-Review Timeline
IJCRP aims to process manuscripts efficiently while maintaining the quality and integrity of peer review.
The duration of peer review may vary depending on:
- Reviewer availability
- Manuscript complexity
- Number of reviewers required
- Revision requirements
- Author response time
The journal does not compromise the rigor of peer review solely to achieve a fixed publication deadline.
- Peer Review and Publication Ethics
IJCRP is committed to responsible peer-review practices and follows recognized principles of ethical scholarly publishing.
The journal takes appropriate action when concerns arise regarding:
- Peer-review manipulation
- Fabricated reviewer identities
- Undisclosed conflicts of interest
- Plagiarism
- Data fabrication or falsification
- Authorship misconduct
- Citation manipulation
- Other forms of publication misconduct
Peer Review Workflow
Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscript through the official IJCRP submission system according to the journal's Author Guidelines.
Initial Editorial Screening
The editorial office checks the manuscript for scope, completeness, formatting, and basic ethical requirements.
Similarity & Research Integrity Check
The manuscript may be screened for plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text reuse, and other research-integrity concerns.
Editorial Assessment
An editor evaluates the manuscript for originality, scientific quality, methodological soundness, relevance, and suitability for peer review.
Reviewer Selection
Qualified and independent external reviewers with appropriate subject expertise are selected, taking conflicts of interest into consideration.
External Peer Review
The selected reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript and provide constructive scientific comments and recommendations.
Reviewer Reports
Reviewer reports are assessed by the responsible editor, who considers the scientific comments, recommendations, and overall quality of the manuscript.
Editorial Decision
Based on the peer-review reports and editorial assessment, the editor may decide: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
Revision, if Required
Authors revise the manuscript and submit a point-by-point response addressing the reviewers' and editor's comments.
Additional Review, if Required
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers when necessary.
Final Editorial Decision
The responsible editor makes the final decision after considering the revised manuscript, reviewer feedback, and author responses.
Acceptance / Rejection
Manuscripts that meet the journal's scientific, editorial, and ethical standards are Accepted for publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the required standards are Rejected.
Our Commitment
IJCRP is committed to fair, independent, confidential, rigorous, and ethical peer review. The journal considers peer review a fundamental component of maintaining the quality and credibility of the scientific record.
