Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The manuscript peer review process employs a double-blind review system. Each submitted manuscript undergoes the following stages:

1. Manuscript Receipt and Initial Screening

The Editorial Board conducts an initial screening of submitted manuscripts, assessing alignment with the journal's focus and scope, originality, writing structure, completeness of article elements, and adherence to author guidelines. A plagiarism check is also performed during this initial stage.

2. Editorial Review

Following the review stage, the responsible editor determines the final decision regarding the submitted manuscript. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal's focus and scope or fail to meet basic publication requirements may be returned to the author or rejected at this early stage. If a manuscript requires refinement, the editor returns it to the author for revision based on the feedback provided. The entire editorial process is completed within a maximum of one month.

3. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that meet the requirements during the initial screening are assigned to at least two reviewers possessing competence and expertise relevant to the article's field of study. Reviewers are given three weeks to review and evaluate the manuscript. Reviewer selection considers expertise alignment and the record of scholarly publications, while also ensuring the absence of potential conflicts of interest in the review process.

4. Review Process

Reviewers conduct the assessment using a double-blind peer review method. Aspects evaluated by reviewers include :

  1. Novelty and originality of the research.
  2. Relevance and contribution to the field of study.
  3. Appropriateness of the problem statement and research objectives.
  4. Suitability and accuracy of the research methodology.
  5. Validity and data analysis.
  6. Discussion and interpretation of results.
  7. Conclusions
  8. Quality and currency of references.
  9. Quality of presentation and article structure.
  10. Adherence to publication ethics.

5. Reviewer Recommendations

Upon completing the review process, the reviewer submits the evaluation results and recommendations to the editor to assist in making a decision regarding the manuscript. Recommendations may include :

  1. Accept: the manuscript may be published without requiring revisions.
  2. Minor Revision: the manuscript is acceptable subject to minor revisions based on the reviewer's suggestions.
  3. Major Revision: the manuscript requires substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication.
  4. Reject: the manuscript is not acceptable for publication based on the reviewer's assessment.

6. AI Usage Policy for Reviewers

Pharmacoscientia Journal employs a double-blind peer review system to maintain objectivity, independence, and confidentiality throughout the review process. Manuscripts submitted to the journal constitute privileged scientific communications and must be treated as information intended solely for the editorial and peer review processes. Consequently, reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript, the authors' identities, research data, supporting materials, and all information obtained during the review process. This principle aligns with ICMJE recommendations regarding the reviewer's responsibility to safeguard the confidentiality of the manuscript and the information contained therein.

Reviewers are prohibited from uploading, copying, inputting, or processing any part or the entirety of a manuscript using AI systems where confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. This prohibition extends to the use of AI for summarizing the manuscript, evaluating its quality or scientific substance, generating review comments or recommendations, and drafting peer review reports. The use of AI to process manuscripts is permitted only if explicitly authorized by Pharmacoscientia and if there are adequate safeguards ensuring the confidentiality of the processed information. This provision adheres to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) principle requiring reviewers to comply with journal policies or obtain prior permission from the journal before utilizing AI to assist in the review process.

Reviewers remain solely responsible for all assessments, comments, recommendations, and decisions submitted to the editor. AI cannot replace the reviewer's scientific, ethical, and professional judgment. Reviewers must verify any AI-generated output used, as AI systems can produce information that is inaccurate, incomplete, biased, or misleading.

  • Permissible Use of AI by Reviewers

Reviewers may use AI to a limited extent as an assistive tool, provided they adhere to Pharmacoscientia Journal’s policies, maintain manuscript confidentiality, and do not delegate the responsibility for scientific assessment to AI. Permissible uses of AI include :

  • assisting in improving grammar, spelling, or language clarity in review comments that have already been drafted and evaluated by the reviewer;
  • helping to explain general terms or concepts that do not require the disclosure of the manuscript's content, data, identities, or confidential information;
  • assisting with administrative tasks that do not involve processing or disclosing manuscript content or confidential information;
  • other uses of AI that have been approved by the editor or the journal and can be carried out while ensuring information confidentiality.

In all such instances, the reviewer must still conduct the review and assessment independently. AI output must not be used as a substitute for critical reading, methodological assessment, interpretation of results, or the reviewer's professional judgment.

If a reviewer uses AI during the review process, such use must comply with Pharmacoscientia Journal’s policies. In accordance with the transparency principles of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), reviewers must also disclose the use of AI to the editor if required by journal policy or requested by the editor; this includes specifying the AI ​​tool used and the purpose of its use.

  • Prohibited Use of AI

To protect the confidentiality, integrity, and independence of the peer review process, reviewers are prohibited from :

  • uploading or inputting all or part of a manuscript into an AI system if the confidentiality of data and information cannot be guaranteed; • using AI to generate the entire peer review report or to replace the reviewer's critical judgment; • delegating scientific evaluations, recommendations, or decisions to AI without human judgment and verification;
  • using AI to assess a manuscript without reading and evaluating the manuscript firsthand;
  • inputting research data, personal data, author identity information, unpublished material, or other confidential information into AI systems that lack adequate confidentiality protections;
  • using information or ideas obtained from the manuscript for personal gain, other research, other publications, or purposes outside the peer review process;
  • disclosing the author's identity, manuscript content, research data, reviewer comments, or other confidential information to unauthorized parties; or
  • using AI in a manner that creates a conflict of interest, compromises the reviewer's independence, or undermines the integrity of the peer review process.

 

  • Reviewer Responsibility Regarding AI Use

The use of AI does not transfer the reviewer's responsibility to the technology or the AI ​​system provider. Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, relevance, objectivity, integrity, and confidentiality of all comments and recommendations submitted to the editor.

Reviewers are required to examine and validate any AI output before use. Reviewers must also ensure that the use of AI does not result in the disclosure of confidential information, copyright infringement, conflicts of interest, bias in assessment, or violations of the Pharmacoscientia Journal's publication ethics policies.

If AI is used in the review process without required authorization or results in a breach of confidentiality, the editor may take appropriate action in accordance with the Pharmacoscientia Journal's ethical policies and editorial procedures.

 

  • Transparency and Disclosure of AI Use

Reviewers utilizing AI during the peer review process must adhere to the disclosure requirements established by the Pharmacoscientia journal. Upon an editor's request, reviewers must provide information regarding :

  • the name or type of AI tool used;
  • the purpose of the AI ​​usage;
  • the specific sections or stages of the review process involving AI; and
  • the steps taken by the reviewer to verify and validate the AI-generated output.

Disclosing the use of AI does not absolve the reviewer of the obligation to maintain manuscript confidentiality. Information regarding AI usage must be communicated to the editor via the journal's designated channels and must not be included in any report that could reveal the reviewer's identity to the author within a double-blind peer review system.

This policy aims to ensure that the use of AI in the peer review process upholds the principles of confidentiality, transparency, accountability, independence, scientific integrity, and human oversight, as emphasized in the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the principles of scientific publication ethics.

7. Editor's Decision

The editor considers the reviewer's assessment and makes a decision regarding the manuscript. The final decision rests with the editor.

8. Revisions by the Author

If the manuscript requires revision, the author must revise it in accordance with the reviewer's comments and recommendations and resubmit the manuscript within the specified timeframe.

9. Re-review

The revised manuscript may be sent back to the same reviewer to ensure that the previous comments and recommendations have been adequately addressed.

10. Final Decision and Publication

Once the manuscript is deemed to meet the journal's scientific standards and editorial requirements, the editor issues a final decision of "accepted." Subsequently, the manuscript undergoes final editing, layout formatting, and proofreading before being published in a journal issue.

Rapid Peer-Review

Process Pharmacoscientia does not accept requests to expedite the peer-review process. Every manuscript submitted to Pharmacoscientia undergoes a fair review process and adheres to the peer-review procedures and guidelines established by the journal.

Publication Frequency

Pharmacoscientia is published in June and December.

Open Access Policy

This journal employs an Open Access policy, allowing the public full and free access to all published articles. This policy aims to expand the global dissemination and exchange of knowledge. As an open-access journal, the full content of the articles is available for free use by readers and institutions alike. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, print, search, link to, and utilize the published articles without requiring prior permission from the publisher or the author, subject to applicable terms of use.