Journal and Book Management System

Edit Content

Title

Content Description

<ul>
	<li><big>Providing written, unbiased, constructive feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer’s opinion</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Indicating whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the work’s composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the journal’s readers</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Avoiding personal comments or criticism</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Notifying the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner and, if able, providing the names of alternative reviewers</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Alerting the editor about any potential personal, financial or perceived conflict of interest and declining to review when a conflict exists</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Noting any ethical concerns, such as any violation of accepted norms of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal that may be known to the reviewer</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Refraining from direct author contact</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Ensuring that the methods and analysis are adequately detailed to allow the reader to judge the scientific merit of the study design and be able to replicate the study</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Ensuring that the article cites all relevant work by other scientists</big></li>
</ul>

<big>Steps involved in the Peer Review Process</big>

<ul>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Editorial Office initially check submissions for basic administrative compliances (duration: 1-2 days), and then forward submissions to the Lead Editor (LE).</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>The LE assigns all papers to AGEs (including himself/herself) (duration: 3 days).</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>AGEs propose at least 2 qualified reviewers per paper (3 reviewers are strongly recommended) to the office (duration: 3 days).</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Editorial Office will communicate with the reviewers for review (duration: 5 days) and authors for the correction (duration: 3 days).</big></li>
</ul>

<big>Privileges of Editors/Reviewers</big>

<ul>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Reviewers will receive a prestigious service certificate which is important for academic and professional enhancement.</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Reviewers will also be privileged to host National/International Conference/workshop at their own place or country.</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Reviewers will get concessions in publication fees in all our journals/magazines. Articles must be prepared in accordance with the author’s guidelines.</big></li>
	<li style="text-align:justify"><big>Reviewers will avail concessions in registration fees in all National/International conference/seminar/workshop organized by SBER/Biotica.</big></li>
</ul>