Submission of a manuscript to the Journal implies that no part of the manuscript has been previously published in any language in a permanent archive, or the whole manuscript or any part of the manuscript is being considered for publication by another journal, or it violates anyone’s copyrights or any other rights. Reproduction of tables and figures from previously published articles must accompany written permission from the copyright holder(s) and should be provided at the time of manuscript submission. Submission of preliminary or inconclusive data is strongly discouraged. However, authors reporting high-impact conclusive preliminary data leading to the opening of new research fields are welcomed. Authors must also submit any closely-related manuscripts in press or submitted for publication to another journal. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining permission of manuscript submission from all co-authors, and for ensuring that all co-authors are in complete agreement with the contents of the manuscript and its authorship. It is also assumed that authors have complied with all ethical and privacy guidelines and/or legislation concerning the submitted work – particularly related to the use of human or animal subjects and cloning research. If the work is multidisciplinary, all collaborators must ensure that they have appropriate measures in place to check the accuracy of their part of the data. The corresponding/senior author has the overall responsibility for the accuracy of the data presented in the manuscript. However, each author also has direct responsibility for the contents of the paper. Editors have the right to accept or reject an article, solely on merit.
Submission of a manuscript to the Journal implies that the author(s) fully agree to and understand the terms and conditions, and accept the policies of the Journal described under the Information for Authors at the time of manuscript submission.
Publication in the Journal implies that authors are prepared to provide, at reasonable costs, on request any reported strains, cell line, clones, molecules, etc., developed in their laboratories that are not commercially available, to colleagues in other academic, medical and non-profit research institutions.
Authors may also consult the uniform guidelines on the various ethical issues, the use of units of measurement, abbreviations and symbols, etc., set out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors on http://www.icmje.org.
Before publication each manuscript submitted to the Journal undergoes a thorough and rigorous peer-review. Final acceptance for all manuscripts is based on quality, impact and originality of research. We aim to complete the whole review process within 21 days. To expedite the review process, authors are encouraged to suggest at least six expert reviewers (provide full contact details and email addresses) for their manuscript and may also request a specific individual to be excluded from the review process (based on conflict of interest). Suggested reviewers should not be past or present research collaborators of any of the authors and should not be from the authors’ host institutions. The Editors will give consideration to the authors’ suggestions; however, their decision to choose or exclude a referee is independent of these suggestions and is final.
Manuscript review is undertaken in the following steps:
- Each manuscript undergoes an initial internal editorial review to ensure that the manuscript meets the scope and the style of the Journal.
- Manuscripts that do not conform to the scope or style of the Journal, are of insufficient interest and quality, or those that are not clearly written, are either rejected or are returned to the authors for a revision.
- On passing the internal editorial review, the manuscripts are sent to 2-4 independent external expert reviewers.
- Once all referees have returned their reports, a decision to accept, reject or revise a manuscript is made based on the referees’ comments and the editorial judgment.
- If applicable the authors are conveyed the reviewers’ comments and asked to answer any criticisms. In the case of substantial criticisms by a referee, the article may be sent back to the concerned referee for a second review.
- Best efforts are made to evaluate arguments given by the referees and the authors before reaching a final decision which rests with the Editor-in-Chief and is made as rapidly as possible.