Peer Review Process
Journal of Drug Vigilance and Alternative Therapies follow double-blind peer review process. If all mentioned conditions for submission and acceptance of manuscripts are satisfied, the papers will be acknowledged when presented to the journal office. Articles that are outside the scope of the journal will be rejected at this stage, and those that are within the scope will be checked for plagiarism using the iThenticate software. Typically, manuscripts with a similarity index of less than 20% are acceptable for further evaluation, while those with a similarity index of more than 30% will be considered highly plagiarized. Before being sent to the reviewers, all manuscripts are submitted to a preliminary review by the journal.
At least two impartial reviewers will go over each submission. Authors are welcome to offer the names of two expert reviewers, but the Editors will make the final choice. The review process is dependent on getting reviewer responses, and writers must revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers' suggestions. The work will be evaluated for English language jargon, grammatical mistakes, and any severe scientific faults, after a thorough plagiarism check.
Within 2 weeks after submission, authors can expect the outcomes of the peer review report of their submitted manuscripts. Authors get the reviewers' comments and are frequently requested to revise the article within four weeks. Editors are in-charge of making the ultimate judgment on the article, which will be based on the suggestions of the reviewers.