Kebijakan Editorial

Fokus dan Ruang Lingkup

The journal includes various fields of pharmaceuticals sciences such as:

  • Pharmaceutical analysis
  • Bioinformatics
  • Biochemistry
  • Biotechnology
  • Pharmacogenomics
  • Pharmacognosy
  • Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics
  • Industrial pharmacy
  • Clinical pharmacy
  • Phytochemistry
  • Pharmaceutical sciences
  • Quality control
  • Pharmaceutical nanotechnology
  • Drug development
  • Pharmacoinformatics
  • Pharmacy Practice
  • Quality assurance
  • Renewable drug delivery systems
  • Validation techniques
  • Herbal technologies
  • Toxicology


Kebijakan Bagian


Centang Naskah Terbuka Centang Diindeks Centang Telah di-Peer review

Proses Peer Review

Peer-Review Process

A manuscript submitted is evaluated through Initial Review by Editorial Board. If the article match the journal requirements in term of the scope, originality, novelty sufficiency of experimental data and format, at least 2 (two) peer reviewers are assigned to review the manuscript with Blind Review Process. Three weeks are alocation time given to peer reviewer to evaluate the manuscript. After review process is finished, the assigned editor makes decision for the article. If the article needs revision, the manuscript is returned to the authors to revise. These processes take a month (maximum time). If the decision is major revision or resubmission, revised manuscript that has been resubmitted by submitter is sent back to the previous peer reviewers for re-evaluation. After that, the editor makes final decision (accepted or rejected). In the each manuscript reviewed, peer reviewers will be rated based on the substantial and technical aspects. Assigment of peer reviewer is based on the expertise and experiences in research and publication relevant to the field of manuscript to be reviewed. Number of citation and h-index value of peer reviewers are parameter examples for consideration in assigning as reviewer.


Rapid Peer-Review Process

Pharmacophore does not accept requests for the rapid peer-review process at all. All manuscripts submitted to Pharmacophore will be treated the same as described in the peer-review process section.


Frekuensi Penerbitan

Pharmacophore published in February and August.


Kebijakan Akses Terbuka

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author.


Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Pharmacophore is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and taking all possible action against publication malpractices. This publication ethics and malpractice statement is compiled from various credible sources, such as Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Pharmacophore is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher as well as the society.

Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Garut University, Indonesia as the publisher of Pharmacophore takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Garut University, and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

The following statement describes the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles for the Pharmacophore, namely: editors, peer reviewers, and authors.

1. Duties of Editors

1.1 Publication Decision

The editor of the Pharmacophore is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be accepted for publication. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. The journal used Turnitin to detect the possibilities of plagiarism in the manuscript.

1.2 Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

1.3 Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial board member must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

1.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

1.5. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

The editor must take sufficiently responsive steps when ethical complaints regarding manuscripts submitted in relation to the publisher (or the public) are found.

These steps generally include contacting the authors of the manuscript and giving consideration to the respective complaints or claims that have been made, further communication to the relevant agencies and research bodies and if the complaint has been upheld then publication corrections, recalls, expressions of apologies, or other notes that may be relevant.


Any reported act of unethical behavior in publication should be kept under scrutiny even if it is discovered several years after publication.


2. Duties of Reviewers

2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewer(s) assists the editorial team in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author. Besides, the reviewer(s) may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2.2 Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

2.3 Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

2.4 Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

2.5 Source Acknowledgment

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

2.6 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Duties of Authors

3.1 Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical conduct and are unacceptable.

3.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.3 Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

3.4 Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.

3.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be in writing. Authors must cite publications that have influenced the research being reported. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties must not be used or reported without written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential service such as jury manuscripts or grant applications may not be used without written permission from the authors involved.

3.6 Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

3.7 Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. The procedures related to humans or animals should be approved by the Ethics Committee and/or refer to the standard procedures.

3.8 Natural Medicine Materials

A study using natural medicine materials should provide the latin names, nomenclature author, family name (in parentheses), the source, extraction/fractionation methods for all collected materials used in the study. Pharmacological Evaluation of the materials should use a reference (positive control).

3.9. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

3.10 Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.


Author Guidelines

A Brief Summary

The Pharmacophore is published 2 times a year (------- and ------), open-access, and double-blind review. Pharmacophore aims to provide updated scientific knowledge for researchers in pharmaceutical and related fields.

The Pharmacophore receives original research articles and review articles on pharmaceutical and related health sciences. The journal accepts manuscipts written in Indonesian or English. The manuscripts received will undergo an initial screening by the editors, before being subjected to a double-blind peer-review by at least two reviewers.


Manuscript Style

The article is written in English or Indonesian and compiled systematically.

  • Original research articles – original research papers which have not been published previously and should not exceed 3000 words (including allowance for no more than 6 tables and figures or other illustrations).
  • Review articles – will be taken into account for publication in the field of the journal’s scope. The review should not exceed 5000 words (including allowance for no more than 6 tables and figures or other illustrations).

The manuscripts should be divided into the following sections:

An abstract (200 - 300 words) embodying the main conclusion and giving the essential information and accompanied with 3 -5 key words

Introduction – should give the research objective and a brief statement of previous relevant work with references;







The article is written in Indonesian or English with Arial font number 11, one space, maximum 10 pages and with margin 4, 4, 3 and 3 from top, left, bottom and right, respectively.

All illustrations including figures, charts and graphs, must be labeled (in the bottom), numbered (1, 2, 3 etc) and supplied on separate pages from the text. The desired placement of illustrations in the text should be clearly indicated. These illustrations should be referred to and numbered serial, as figures. All illustrations should be clearly drawn in permanent ink or photographed in sharp black and white and reproduced in the form of high – contrast glossy prints or digital images and provided in camera ready form.

Reference list format is based on Vancouver style. Reference list should appear at the end of the article and includes only literatures actually cited in the manuscripts. Author should use reference management tool such as Mendeley, End Note and Grammarly. When writing a reference list, please use the following conventions.

For sample,

Journal article:

  • Shukr MH, Metwally GF. Evaluation of topical gel bases formulated with various essential oils for antibacterial activity against methicillin- resistant staphylococcus aureus. Trop J Pharm Res. 2013;12(6):877–84.

Book chapters:

  • Davenport A. Chronic kidney failure: renal replacement therapy. In: Kidney transplantation: principles and practice. Seventh Ed. London: Elsevier; 2014. p. 39–53.


  • Clark DP, Pazdernik NJ. Biotechnology. Second Ed. London: Elsevier; 2016. 5–10 p.


  • Saliba D. Implementation of pharmaceutical care model withnin haematology [Internet]. University of Malta; 2018. Available from: 030 - SALIBA Diane - PharmD Thesis.pdf


  • World Health Organization. International agency for research on cancer [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Mar 10]. p. 99–100. Available from:


Review Guidelines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

  1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is the good reason.
  2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
  3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
  4. Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
  5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.

 Full Review Process of Manuscript

  1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organization?
  2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
  3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
  4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
  5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
  6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
  7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.


Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)

Authors are not required to pay an article submission

Online Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)

If this paper is accepted for publication, Authors are not required to pay an online Article Publication


Plagiarism Policies

Pharmacophore state that plagiarism is not acceptable for all author and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified by plagiarism cheker software in an article that is submitted for publication. We are using Turnitin  as the plagiarism checker software.

 “Plagiarism is copying another person’s text or ideas and passing the copied material as your own work. You must both delineate (i.e., separate and identify) the copied text from your text and give credit to (i.e., cite the source) the source of the copied text to avoid accusations of plagiarism.  Plagiarism is considered fraud and has potentially harsh consequences including loss of job, loss of reputation, and the assignation of reduced or failing grade in a course."

This definition of plagiarism applies for copied text and ideas:

  1. Regardless of the source of the copied text or idea.
  2. Regardless of whether the author(s) of the text or idea which you have copied actually copied that  text or idea from another source.
  3. Regardless of whether or not the authorship of the text or idea which you copy is known
  4. Regardless of the nature of your text (journal paper/article, web page, book chapter, paper submitted for a college course, etc) into which you copy the text or idea
  5. Regardless of whether or not the author of the source of the copied material gives permission for the material to be copied; and
  6. Regardless of whether you are or are not the author of the source of the copied text or idea (self-plagiarism).

When plagiarism is identified by the Plagiarism Checker  software,  the Editorial Board responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the article in agreement with the following guidelines:

Minor Plagiarism

A small sentence or short paragraph of another manuscript is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other papers or publications.

Punishment: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the manuscript and properly cite the original sources.

Intermediate Plagiarism

A significant data, paragraph, or sentence of an article is plagiarized without proper citation to the original source.

Punishment: The submitted article is automatic rejected.

Severe Plagiarism

A large portion of an article is plagiarized that involves many aspects such as reproducing original results (data, formulation, equation, law, statement, etc.), ideas, and methods presented in other publications.

Punishment: The paper is automatic rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles to the journal.


The articles published in Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari will be considered to retract in the publication if:

  1. they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follow the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at