Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Dhaara Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences undergo rigorous double-blind peer review, in which both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to one another. The full process, from submission to final publication, has eleven stages.

Step 1: Online Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system, along with all required documents: the cover letter, copyright transfer form, ethical approval (where applicable), conflict of interest declaration, and any supplementary files.

Step 2: Initial Editorial Assessment

The Editorial Office performs a preliminary screening to ensure the manuscript meets the journal's submission requirements, evaluating:

  • Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
  • Compliance with author guidelines and manuscript formatting
  • Completeness of all mandatory documents
  • Quality and clarity of figures, tables, and supplementary materials
  • Accuracy of references and citation style
  • Ethical compliance and research integrity
  • Similarity check using iThenticate (plagiarism screening)

Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for technical revision, or rejected before peer review.

Step 3: Editorial Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief or handling editor evaluates the scientific merit, novelty, significance and suitability of the manuscript. Suitable submissions are assigned to expert reviewers under a double-blind peer review system, where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential.

Step 4: Double-Blind Peer Review

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent experts with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers assess the manuscript on:

  • Originality and scientific novelty
  • Technical and methodological quality
  • Validity of experimental design and statistical analysis
  • Ethical compliance
  • Quality of data presentation
  • Interpretation of results
  • Significance to the field
  • Clarity, organisation, and language
  • Compliance with the journal's aims and scope

Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations for editorial consideration. We aim to deliver a first decision within 21 days of submission.

Step 5: Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' reports, the handling editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

Reviewer comments are communicated anonymously to the corresponding author.

Step 6: Author Revision

Authors revise the manuscript by addressing all reviewer comments and submit:

  • The revised manuscript
  • A point-by-point response to reviewers
  • A marked (tracked-changes) version, if requested

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation where necessary.

Step 7: Final Editorial Decision

After satisfactory revision and reviewer recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision. Accepted manuscripts proceed to production.

Step 8: Production Process

Accepted manuscripts undergo professional production, including:

  • Copyediting
  • Language editing
  • Typesetting
  • Figure quality assessment
  • DOI assignment
  • Galley proof preparation

Step 9: Author Proofreading

The corresponding author receives page proofs (galley proofs) for final proofreading. Authors review the proofs and return only essential typographical or production corrections within the specified timeframe.

Step 10: Online First Publication

After incorporation of the final corrections, the article is published online with a DOI as an "Online First" article, enabling immediate citation before issue assignment.

Step 11: Final Publication

The article is assigned to a journal issue and published in its final version in both online (HTML/PDF/XML, where applicable) and print formats.