When a manuscript is submitted to the journal, it is assessed to see if it meets the criteria for submission. If it does, the editorial team will select potential peer reviewers within the field of research to peer-review the manuscript and make their recommendations.

Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent scientists in the relevant research area evaluate submitted manuscripts for originality, validity, and significance to help MJPPS editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal or not. The journal confirms the double-blind peer review system (the reviewers do not know the names of the authors and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript).

Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that confirms the validity of the manuscript. By undergoing peer review, manuscripts should become more robust, easier to read, and more useful. Before accepting to review a manuscript, reviewers should ensure that the manuscript is within their area of expertise and they can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.

Confidentiality: Manuscripts are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. Reviewers should ensure that the review processes are confidential. Details of the manuscript and the review process should remain confidential during and after the review process.

Plagiarism: The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own’ Oxford Dictionaries. It is unethical for reviewers to “use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others”.

Fairness: Reviews should be honest and objective. Reviewers should not be influenced by the origin of the manuscript, the religious, political, or cultural viewpoint of the author, and gender, race, ethnicity, or citizenry of the author. The validity and the quality of the content presented are the only grounds for evaluation.

Review reports: In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on originality, contribution to the field, technical quality, clarity of presentation, and depth of research. The report should be accurate, objective, constructive and unambiguous. Comments should be backed by facts and constructive arguments with regard to the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should not rewrite the manuscript; however necessary corrections and suggestions for improvements should be made.

Timeliness: Reviewers should only accept manuscripts that they are confident that they can dedicate an appropriate time to reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner.

Recommendations: Reviewers’ recommendations should be either accept with no corrections, requires minor corrections, major corrections, or reject.

More Points to Note

- Reviewers should be able to evaluate the entirety of a manuscript.
- Reviewers do not edit manuscript content but provide comments and suggestions for improvement.
- Reviewers should not contact the author without permission from the Editor-in-Chief.
- Any questions about reviewing process should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief.

Publication Ethics

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Publication malpractice is an unfortunate occurrence in the world of scholarly literature and its prevention is the responsibility of every author, editor, reviewer, and publisher. Authors are expected to maintain the ethical standards and conduct that remain mandatory in scholarly publishing. During the submission, authors need to state that their work has not been submitted elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers are expected to be aware and refer to COPE's.

COPE flow charts (please follow the below link) shall also be considered while dealing with plagiarism complaints.

• Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript
• Suspected plagiarism in a published manuscript.

Duties of the editor and editorial board:

• Publication decisions: The editor of the Mediterranean Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal should be published and the editorial board makes the final decision about the articles to be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements. The editor may consult with the editorial board or reviewers in decision-making.
• Fair play: The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, as appropriate.

Duties of Reviewers:

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors:

• Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• Originality and Plagiarism: 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. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. The Journal has a strict policy against plagiarism. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• Acknowledgment of Sources: 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
• Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. 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.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
• Fundamental errors in published work: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent

Published research must comply with the guidelines for human studies and animal welfare rules.

The authors must state that individuals have participated in the study with informed consent and the study protocol has been approved by the Institute's "Human Research Committee".