Reviewers' Guidelines

Reviewers' Guidelines

  • Introduction
  • Conflict of interest
  • Timeliness
  • Completion of the Review form
  • Resources

 

Introduction

Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (IJPS) is the peer-review journal that use the process to evaluate the quality of manuscripts before publication. In this method, manuscripts accept for review are sent to our reviewers (based on their specialty) after removing title page from a submitted manuscript. Manuscripts will be reviewed in double blind method. Minimum two specialized and a biostatistician referees check each manuscript. It mentioned that manuscripts refer to articles that received from authors and has not been published.

We send manuscripts to reviewers by email if the reviewers in ten days accept review, each reviewer has two to four weeks to review if not we send that to other reviewers. Each reviewer should register in the journal website and inter to reviewer dashboard to find manuscript. In addition, we want to authors to introduce willing and unwilling reviewers.

If you have been selected as a referee for a manuscript, please pay attention to the following points before starting the refereeing:

  • Make sure that the topic and content of the article are consistent with your knowledge and expertise, and if it is not consistent, immediately inform the journal office.
  • Keep in mind that the manuscript file and all its appendices are confidential until publication and should not be shared or made publicly available.
  • Write your comments to the editors fairly as if the authors might read them too and as if the reviewer signs the peer-review (1).

Conflict of interest

As a reviewer, please try to improve the quality of the article by conducting a fair review and providing appropriate guidance and solutions to the authors. We will be very grateful if you do not accept the refereeing of the manuscripts in which you have a conflict of interest due to competitive, cooperative, or otherwise relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the manuscript, and inform the editor-in-chief with mention the reason and reflect (2, 3).

Timeliness

Please note that after sending the invitation email, you have one week to respond to it. Also, considering that the editorial board of the journal tends to speed up the review process, you have two weeks to review after accepting the request. If, for any reason, either before accepting the referee or during the refereeing, you find out that you cannot do the refereeing within the specified time frame, please inform the editorial board of the journal so that we can find a new person as soon as possible as your replacement (2).

Use of Artificial Intelligence and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Manuscripts

Confidentiality and Data Protection Reviewers must not upload or disclose any part of a submitted manuscript—including its title, abstract, text, figures, tables, supplementary files, or related correspondence—to a public or otherwise unauthorized generative AI tool. Manuscripts submitted to International Pharmacy Acta are confidential. Sharing them with external platforms may expose unpublished work or sensitive information to unauthorized access or retention.
Human Judgment and Accountability
Reviewers are responsible for evaluating the manuscript’s scientific quality, methods, statistical analysis, ethical considerations, and relevance. They must not use generative AI to assess a manuscript, identify its strengths or weaknesses, formulate an editorial recommendation, or generate or draft a peer-review report. The submitted review must represent the reviewer’s own expert judgment.
Permitted Language Assistance
Reviewers may use conventional spelling or grammar tools to edit a review they have written themselves, provided that doing so does not disclose confidential manuscript content to an external service. Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and confidentiality of the final report.
Disclosure and Policy Violations
Reviewers must ensure that their reports reflect their own independent assessment and comply with the journal’s confidentiality requirements. A reviewer who discloses manuscript content to an unauthorized AI tool or submits an AI-generated assessment may be removed from the journal’s reviewer pool. The journal will consider further action, where appropriate, in accordance with its publication-ethics procedures.

Please, after entering the article's details, including the code, type, and title of the manuscript, mention your name as a signature in the relevant field. Then, after entering the review date, fill out the questionnaire in the form of four-choice questions. The answer to each question is mandatory, and failure to answer any of them will make you unable to submit the review form.

Finally, if you have a file containing your comments related to the review or have made any corrections to the article that you would like the authors to know, please upload it in the Reviewer Files section. Also, in the Review Discussions section, mention your corrective comments to the editor of JCMA. The editorial board's advice to you is that for the authors to pay more attention to your comments in the beginning, briefly, and within the framework of the existing literature and current knowledge, tell what the article is about and what findings it has, in Explain the strengths of the work. Also, if you think the article is rejected, please do not overdo it in expressing negative comments.

It should be noted that completing these two parts is entirely optional. Finally, express your recommendation as a referee by specifying one of the following:

 Accepted.

 Minor revisions.

 Major revisions.

 Rejected

Resources

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

ICMJE - Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process

WAME - Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals

Information

Make a Submission

Make a Submission