Peer Review Process

European Journal of Clinical Pharmacy®

ISSN (Online): 2385-409X

The European Journal of Clinical Pharmacy® (EJCP) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the integrity, quality, and relevance of all published research. This process is designed to maintain transparency, minimize bias, and uphold high scientific standards.

1. Submission and Initial Screening

• Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system.

• The Editorial Office conducts an initial screening to assess:

  • Adherence to submission guidelines

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

  • Basic scientific quality and ethical compliance

• Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria may be desk rejected without external review.

2. Assignment to Editor

• Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to a Section Editor or the Editor-in-Chief based on the subject area.

• The assigned editor evaluates the manuscript and identifies suitable reviewers.

3. Reviewer Selection

• The manuscript is sent to two or more independent experts in the relevant field.

• Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication history, and absence of conflicts of interest.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

• The identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept anonymous throughout the review process.

• Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • Scientific validity and originality

  • Methodological soundness

  • Clinical relevance and significance

  • Quality of data and interpretation

  • Language clarity and structure

• Reviewers submit a detailed report along with a recommendation:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revisions

  • Major Revisions

  • Reject

5. Editorial Decision

• The Editor evaluates all reviewer comments and makes one of the following decisions:

   

  • Accept: Manuscript is accepted as is or with minor corrections.

  • Revise: Authors are invited to submit a revised version addressing reviewer feedback.

  • Reject: Manuscript is declined due to major flaws or lack of fit.

6. Revision and Re-review (if applicable)

• Authors revise the manuscript and submit a detailed response to reviewer comments.

• The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers or new reviewers for further evaluation.

7. Final Decision and Acceptance

• Once all concerns are satisfactorily addressed, the Editor issues a final acceptance decision.

• Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, and online publication.

8. Appeals

• Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a clear, detailed explanation and justification.

• Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, if necessary, an independent editorial board member.