Editorial Policy

Editorial policy

Peer Review process:- Every submission is subjected to an initial review by an editor and is screened for plagiarism to ensure originality of the work. Manuscripts that conform to the journal’s guidelines and basic quality criteria are subsequently assigned to reviewers for further evaluation. The editorial team selects two to three reviewers, combining both internal and external experts, to assess and provide feedback on the quality of the work. The journal follows a single-blind peer review policy where reviewers know the authors' identities but the authors do not know who their reviewers are. Reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and its abstract until publication and to avoid any direct or indirect disclosure of their identity, including through comments or file metadata. Reviewers are required to maintain an objective, professional and respectful tone throughout their evaluations. Comments should be constructive and focused on improving the quality, clarity and scientific rigor of the manuscript. Personal attacks, derogatory language or inappropriate remarks should be avoided. The reviewers provide detailed feedback to ensure the manuscript meets the journal’s standards before publication. Based on the reviewers' comments, the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding the acceptability of manuscript, which is then communicated to the authors along with the reviewers’ reports. When major revisions are suggested, publication is subject to the author effectively implementing the recommended changes.

To maintain integrity and objectivity in the peer-review process, the reviewers must decline an assignment if a potential conflict of interest (COI) exists. 

Primary Conditions for Declining

Reviewers should not evaluate a submission if any of the following apply:

Direct Relationships: They have a personal, professional or financial connection with any of the authors.

Recent Collaboration: They have co-authored a paper or collaborated on a research project with the authors within the last three to five years.

Institutional Conflicts: They are currently affiliated with the same department or institution as one of the authors.

Competitive Interests: They are working on a nearly identical project that would benefit from delaying the author's publication or gaining "insider" knowledge

Actions upon disclosure of a conflict

The journal will take the following actions upon disclosure of a conflict:

Assign a different reviewer or editor.

Request clarification or additional disclosure from authors.

Evaluate whether the conflict compromises the integrity of the research.

General Principle:- Editors must avoid handling the manuscript where they have personal, professional, financial or institutional conflicts of interest with the authors that could bias editorial decisions.

Authors must disclose:

Funding sources

Financial ties (grants, consulting fees, stock ownership, patents)

Personal or professional relationships that may bias the work

Institutional or organizational support

A Conflict of Interest Statement must be included in every submission.

If no conflicts exist, authors must state:

“The authors declare no conflicts of interest”.

Conflicts of interest may lead to the rejection of the manuscript. If undisclosed conflicts are discovered after publication, it may lead to a correction, retraction or notification to the author’s institution.