Online ISSN: 2250-1177
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
All Submissions should conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Medical Journals by ICMJE.
This journal follows double-blind peer review system. All submissions will be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. All manuscripts will be acknowledged upon presenting to the Journal office, provided that all stated requirements are met. All manuscript subjected to preliminary review by editorial team before sending it to the reviewers for review. Authors are encouraged to suggest names of two expert reviewers, but the selection of reviewer will depend on the decision of Editors. Review process depends on receiving reviewers comments and revision of manuscript by authors must adhere to the comments provided by reviewers. Authors have the right to communicate to the editor if they do not wish their manuscript to be reviewed by a particular reviewer because of potential conflicts of interest. No article is rejected unless negative comments are received from at least one reviewer.
Approximately 55 percent of submitted manuscripts are accepted for publication.
Authors should expect to hear the results of the manuscript peer review within 5 weeks from the date of submission. Authors receive the reviewers’ comments and are often asked to revise the manuscript in line with the reviewers’ and/or editor’s suggestions within 4 weeks. If the revised article is accepted for publication, the editor then determines the journal issue in which it will appear. Accepted articles will usually appear in the next issue of the journal.
Journal of Drug Delivery & therapeutics bimonthly journal (6 issue/year). We always publish every issue timely since starting of this journal. Issue schedule is 15-Jan, 15-March, 15-May, 15-July, 15-September and 15-November in every year for issue 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 respectively.
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...
This Journal provides an OAI-PMH(Open Archives Initiatives Protocol for Metadata Harvesting) interface for metadata harvesting. We fully support and implement the OAI version 2.0, which comes in a standard XML format.
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
- The submission file is in Open Office, Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format.
- Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
- Manuscripts should be written as per instructions provided in Authors Guidelinessection and accompanied by a covering letter stating the originality and significance of the submitted manuscripts.
- The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines, which is found in About the Journal.
- Numbers of Authors: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study.
- If at any point, the author(s) discovers a significant error in submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.
- 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.
- 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.
- Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
- 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.
- Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidentialand treat them as privileged information.
- Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticismof the author.
- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
- Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interestresulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Editorial Staff’s responsibilities
- The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
- 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.
- 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.
- The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- 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.
To maintain the relationship with editors and parties involved in the publication and should support the editorial decisions and should work in the way to achieve the publication goal set by the editor.
To maintain the confidentiality of author and his/her research work.
Maintain the policies
To promote and encourage policies regarding journals ethics, authorship, editorial independence, conflict of interest, research funding, review system and process.
Corrections, Retractions, Republication, and errors
To publish corrections, clarification, retractions whenever required. Publication should be done on the timely basis to achieve timeliness of publishing schedule of the journal.
Honest errors are a part of science and publishing and require publication of a correction when they are detected. So Correction, Retractions, Republication, and errors are handled as per standards prescribed by IJMJE
What to do in case of redundant (duplicate) publication
- Suspected redundant publication in a submitted manuscript (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/01A_Redundant_Submitted.pdf )
- Suspected redundant publication in a published article (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/01B_Redundant_Published.pdf )
What to do in case of suspect plagiarism
- Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript ( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02A_Plagiarism_Submitted.pdf)
- Suspected plagiarism in a published article ( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02B_Plagiarism_Published.pdf )
What to do in case of fabricated data
- Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20A%20revised%20May%202011.pdf )
- Suspected fabricated data in a published article (http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20B%20revised.pdf )
If Changes in authorship
Corresponding author requests addition of extra author before publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04A_Author_Add_Submitted.pdf )
Corresponding author requests removal of author before publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04B_Author_Remove_Submitted.pdf )
Request for addition of extra author after publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04C_Author_Add_Published.pdf )
Request for removal of author after publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04D_Author_Remove_Published.pdf )
Suspected guest, ghost or gift authorship
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04E_Author_Ghost_Guest_Gift.pdf )
Advice on how to spot authorship problems
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04F_How_to_spot_author_problems.pdf )
What to do if a reviewer suspects case of undisclosed conflict of interest (CoI) in a submitted manuscript
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/05A_CoI_Submitted.pdf )
What to do if a reader suspects case of undisclosed conflict of interest (CoI) in a published article
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/05B_CoI_Published.pdf )
What to do if case an ethical problem with a submitted manuscript
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/06_Ethics_Submitted.pdf )
What to do if case of reviewer has appropriated an author’s idea or data
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/07_Reviewer_misconduct.pdf )
How COPE handles complaints against editors
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Complaints%20revised%20Apr%2012.pdf )