When a manuscript is submitted to the journal, it is assessed to see if it meets the criteria for submission. If it does, the editorial team will select potential peer reviewers within the field of research to peer-review the manuscript and make their recommendations.
Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent scientists in the relevant research area evaluate submitted manuscripts for originality, validity, and significance to help Mediterranean Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (MJPPS) editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal or not.
The MJPPS confirms the double-blind peer review system (the reviewers do not know the names of the authors and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript).
Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that confirms the validity of the manuscript. Peer reviewers are experts who volunteer their time to improve the manuscripts they reviewed. By undergoing peer review, manuscripts should become more robust, easier to read, and more useful. The review process is an important aspect of an article publication. Before accepting to review a manuscript, reviewers should ensure that the manuscript is within their area of expertise and they can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.
Manuscripts are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. Reviewers should ensure that the review processes are confidential. Details of the manuscript and the review process should remain confidential during and after the review process.
The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own’ Oxford Dictionaries. It is unethical for reviewers to “use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others”.
Reviews should be honest and objective. Reviewers should not be influenced by the origin of the manuscript, the religious, political, or cultural viewpoint of the author, and gender, race, ethnicity, or citizenry of the author. The validity and the quality of the content presented are the only grounds for evaluation.
In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on originality, contribution to the field, technical quality, clarity of presentation, and depth of research. The report should be accurate, objective, constructive and unambiguous. Comments should be backed by facts and constructive arguments with regard to the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should not rewrite the manuscript; however necessary corrections and suggestions for improvements should be made.
Reviewers should only accept manuscripts that they are confident that they can dedicate an appropriate time to reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner.
Reviewers’ recommendations should be either accept with no corrections, requires minor corrections, major corrections, or reject.
More Points to Note
- Reviewers should be able to evaluate the entirety of a manuscript.
- Reviewers do not edit manuscript content but provide comments and suggestions for improvement.
- Reviewers should not contact the author without permission from the Editor-in-Chief.
- Any questions about reviewing process should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief.