Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process and Policy
The International Journal of Green Pharmacy (IJGP) follows a double-blind peer-review process for scholarly manuscripts.
Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other during the peer-review process. Author-identifying information is removed from the manuscript before it is sent to reviewers.
Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editorial Office for:
- Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
- Scientific and academic suitability
- Originality and basic quality
- Compliance with the Author Guidelines
- Ethical requirements
- Plagiarism and inappropriate text reuse
- Completeness of the submission
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be rejected without external peer review.
External Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are sent to at least two independent external reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on factors including:
- Originality and novelty
- Scientific validity
- Methodological rigor
- Quality and interpretation of data
- Clarity of presentation
- Relevance to the journal's scope
- Ethical compliance
- Adequacy of references and supporting evidence
Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers may recommend:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
The Editor-in-Chief may request additional reviews when the reviewer reports are contradictory or when further specialist assessment is considered necessary.
Editorial Decision
Reviewers provide recommendations to the Editorial Office. The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into consideration the peer-review reports, scientific quality, ethical compliance, and relevance of the manuscript.
Peer reviewers do not make the final publication decision.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Peer-review reports and communications are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, share, or use unpublished manuscript information for personal or professional purposes.
Reviewers are expected to declare any actual or potential conflict of interest before accepting a review assignment.
Author-Recommended Reviewers
Authors may suggest potential reviewers where permitted by the Editorial Office. The journal is not obligated to use author-recommended reviewers, and suggested reviewers are independently evaluated for suitability and conflicts of interest.
Exceptions to Peer Review
All scholarly research articles, review articles, short communications, and case reports submitted for publication are subject to editorial assessment and appropriate peer review.
Editorial material that does not constitute a scholarly research article may be handled according to its nature and may not require external peer review.
Revision and Re-review
When revisions are requested, authors must respond to reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript within the period specified by the Editorial Office.
Majorly revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.
No Guarantee of Acceptance
Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee acceptance or publication. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit and the journal's editorial and ethical standards.
Peer-Review Integrity
The journal does not permit payment to influence peer-review or editorial decisions. Acceptance decisions are independent of the payment of publication charges.