Natural Bio Products Journal
This guideline is prepared to assist reviewers of the journal in conducting double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted to Natural Bio Products Journal.
Reading this guideline answers most questions of reviewers and guides them completely and through the fastest method in completing the double-blind peer review report to ensure that the submitted manuscript is properly evaluated and published in the shortest possible time.
If you have any further questions, please contact the journal office through the journal email.
Authors have always complained about the duration of peer review and publication of manuscripts; therefore, Farnam Publications makes great efforts to review and publish manuscripts as correctly, fairly, and quickly as possible.
Therefore, reviewers are requested to send their comments to the journal office within 14 working days .
All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo double-blind peer review. Farnam Publications believes that using anonymous peer reviewers is the best way to receive honest opinions regarding manuscripts.
Farnam Publications believes that the use of anonymous peer reviewers is the best way to receive honest opinions regarding manuscripts. Therefore, Farnam Publications requires that reviewers do not communicate directly with authors.
Reviewers must read the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers before accepting and starting the review of a manuscript and must follow the provided criteria.
The overall process of a manuscript journey in Farnam Publications, from submission to publication, can be observed through the following steps.
The opinions and recommendations of peer reviewers are an essential guide for informing and assisting the editor in making decisions regarding a manuscript.
Peer review ensures that manuscripts receive unbiased criticism and expert feedback.
Peer review allows authors to improve their manuscripts and therefore high-quality scientific research results can be published.
Peer review helps readers trust the scientific validity of published manuscripts and make informed decisions when reviewer comments are available.
After receiving a request to conduct peer review of a manuscript, reviewers must respond regarding acceptance or rejection of the review request as quickly as possible to prevent delaying the manuscript evaluation process.
Peer reviewers, while having sufficient knowledge and awareness regarding conflicts of interest, must declare any conflict to the journal office so that a complete evaluation of the manuscript can be conducted.
Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest regarding the manuscript before starting the review process.
Reviewers must keep all information regarding the identity of authors and the content of the manuscript confidential.
Peer review comments must be unbiased and constructive and should not be written in a hostile or inappropriate manner.
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on scientific quality, methodological validity, and research significance.
Reviewers must read the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers before accepting and starting the review of a manuscript and must follow the provided criteria.
More information regarding ethical issues in peer review and conflicts of interest can be found in the COPE guidelines.
Natural Bio Products Journal (NBPJ), through implementation of the double-blind peer review process, aims to ensure that manuscript evaluation is conducted fairly, transparently, and professionally, and that high-quality research is published and made available to the scientific community in the shortest possible time.