International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Medical Sciences (IJPRMS) is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and promoting responsible research and publication practices. Submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism-detection software, such as Turnitin or other appropriate similarity-detection systems. Manuscripts identified as containing plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated material, or other forms of publication misconduct may be rejected or subjected to further investigation and appropriate editorial action.

Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the unethical practice of using another person’s work, ideas, words, data, or other intellectual contributions without proper acknowledgment. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

Copying text, figures, tables, images, or data from another source without appropriate citation.

Paraphrasing, summarizing, or substantially reproducing another person’s work without giving proper credit.

Reusing significant portions of one’s own previously published work (self-plagiarism) without appropriate citation or disclosure.

Presenting another person’s ideas, findings, or intellectual contributions as one’s own.

Plagiarism Detection

1. Screening Process

All manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS undergo plagiarism screening using reliable plagiarism-detection software, such as Turnitin or iThenticate, as part of the editorial evaluation process.

2. Similarity Threshold

Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 10%, excluding references, properly cited direct quotations, and commonly used phrases, will be flagged for further editorial review.

The similarity index will not be considered the sole basis for determining plagiarism. The editorial team will examine the nature, extent, and sources of the identified overlap before making a final decision.

Consequences of Plagiarism

Before Publication

Minor Overlap: Authors may be asked to revise the manuscript, appropriately paraphrase the affected sections, and provide proper attribution and citations.

Significant or Unethical Overlap: The manuscript may be rejected, and the authors will be informed of the reason for the editorial decision.

Serious or Deliberate Plagiarism: The journal may take additional action in accordance with applicable publication-ethics standards.

After Publication

If plagiarism or substantial unattributed duplication is discovered after publication:

The journal may issue a formal retraction of the published article.

A retraction notice will be published online, clearly stating the reason for the retraction.

The authors affiliated institutions and relevant funding bodies may be notified where appropriate.

The article may be marked as retracted in the journal’s online records and indexing systems, where applicable.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors submitting manuscripts to IJPRMS are responsible for:

Ensuring that the submitted manuscript is original and has not been published elsewhere.

Providing appropriate citations and acknowledgments for all sources used.

Clearly identifying and citing previously published material, including the authors’ own work.

Avoiding simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals.

Obtaining appropriate permission for copyrighted material when required.

Ensuring that all authors are aware of and agree to the manuscript’s submission and its originality.

Editorial and Reviewer Responsibilities

The editorial team and reviewers of IJPRMS are expected to remain vigilant in identifying potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, and other forms of inappropriate textual or intellectual overlap.

Any suspected case of plagiarism should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief for appropriate investigation. The journal will assess suspected cases fairly and confidentially and may request explanations or supporting information from the authors when necessary.

Commitment to Academic Integrity

IJPRMS is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic and publication integrity. The journal promotes originality, transparency, proper attribution, and responsible research and publication practices.

By submitting a manuscript to IJPRMS, authors acknowledge and agree to comply with this plagiarism policy and the journal’s broader ethical standards. The journal reserves the right to take appropriate editorial action when plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct are identified.

The International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Medical Sciences (IJPRMS) is committed to maintaining high standards of academic quality, scientific integrity, and ethical publishing. The journal follows a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential to the extent practicable. This process is intended to ensure that manuscripts are evaluated objectively, fairly, and solely on the basis of their scientific quality, originality, relevance, and methodological rigor.

1. Double-Blind Pe er Review

The identities of the authors are not disclosed to the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors during the peer review process.

Manuscripts are evaluated objectively, with emphasis on the scientific content, originality, methodology, validity of the findings, and overall scholarly contribution.

Authors should prepare manuscripts in a manner that does not unnecessarily reveal their identities within the blinded manuscript file.

2. Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the editorial team to determine whether they:

fall within the scope of IJPRMS;

meet the journal's submission and formatting requirements;

demonstrate sufficient originality and scientific relevance;

meet the minimum standards required for peer review.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements or scope may be rejected or returned to the authors before external peer review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are normally sent to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant subject area.

Reviewers are selected on the basis of their:

subject expertise;

academic and research experience;

ability to provide an objective and timely assessment.

The journal may invite additional reviewers when necessary, particularly where specialist expertise is required or when the reviewers' recommendations substantially differ.

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts critically and constructively. The assessment may include the following criteria:

Originality and novelty of the research.

Scientific significance and contribution to the field.

Clarity, structure, and organization of the manuscript.

Appropriateness and methodological rigor of the study design.

Validity and reliability of the results and their interpretation.

Relevance to pharmaceutical, medical, and related biomedical sciences.

Adequacy of references and appropriate citation of relevant literature.

Compliance with applicable research ethics and publication standards.

Quality and clarity of tables, figures, and other supporting materials, where applicable.

Reviewers may also identify methodological limitations, inconsistencies, unsupported conclusions, or other issues that should be addressed before publication.

Reviewers are expected to provide clear, evidence-based, and constructive comments to assist the authors in improving the manuscript.

A reviewer may recommend one of the following:

The reviewer's recommendation is advisory. The final editorial decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated editor.

After considering the reviewers' comments and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor makes an editorial decision. Where revisions are requested, the authors are required to respond appropriately to the reviewers' comments and submit a revised manuscript within the specified period. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editorial team, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions. The journal reserves the right to request further revisions or additional peer review when necessary, before reaching a final decision.

Once a manuscript has been accepted, it may undergo editorial processing, including copyediting, formatting, typesetting, and preparation for online publication. A DOI may be assigned where applicable.

Acceptance for publication is subject to the manuscript satisfying the journal's editorial, scientific, and ethical requirements.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

Provide an objective, impartial, and constructive assessment of the manuscript.

Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and its contents.

Complete the review within the agreed timeframe or promptly inform the editorial office if an extension is required.

Decline the review if they do not possess appropriate expertise or cannot provide an impartial assessment.

Disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting or completing the review.

Avoid using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

Identify relevant published work that has not been appropriately cited, where applicable.

Inform the editorial team of any concerns regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data manipulation, image manipulation, or other potential ethical violations.

Provide professional and respectful comments that are focused on improving the quality of the manuscript.

4. Peer Review Timeline

Reviewers are generally requested to complete their evaluations within 2–4 weeks, although the actual review period may vary depending on the subject area, reviewer availability, and manuscript complexity. Authors are generally expected to submit revised manuscripts within 2–3 weeks of receiving a revision decision. The editorial office may grant an extension upon a reasonable request. The journal aims to process manuscripts as efficiently as possible while maintaining the quality and integrity of the peer review process.

5. Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was made on the basis of a significant error, misunderstanding, or procedural irregularity may submit an appeal to the editorial office.

Appeals should:

clearly state the manuscript identification details;

explain the specific grounds for the appeal;

provide supporting information where appropriate.

Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate independent editor. Where necessary, an additional independent assessment may be obtained. The decision following an appeal is normally final. An appeal is not intended simply to provide an opportunity to dispute a decision because the authors disagree with the reviewers' scientific opinions.

6. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose manuscript contents, review reports, or other confidential information to unauthorized individuals.

Reviewers must not share, copy, distribute, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for purposes unrelated to the peer review process.

7. Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect the impartial evaluation of a manuscript. A reviewer should decline an assignment where a personal, professional, financial, institutional, or other relationship may compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their objectivity.

8. Ethical Standards

IJPRMS is committed to ethical and responsible scholarly publishing. The journal expects authors, editors, and reviewers to follow recognized principles of publication ethics and research integrity, including applicable guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or manipulated data, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unethical research practices, or other forms of publication misconduct may be investigated in accordance with the journal's applicable ethical procedures.

9. Editorial Independence

Peer reviewers provide recommendations to assist the editorial team; however, reviewers do not make the final publication decision. The Editor-in-Chief or designated editor retains responsibility for the final editorial decision based on the quality of the manuscript, reviewer evaluations, ethical considerations, and the journal's editorial standards. The journal seeks to ensure that editorial decisions are made independently and without inappropriate influence from authors, reviewers, sponsors, or other external parties.

The International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Medical Sciences (IJPRMS) recognizes that Artificial Intelligence (AI), Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI), and Large Language Models (LLMs) can assist researchers, authors, reviewers, and editors in various aspects of scholarly communication. The journal permits responsible and transparent use of AI-assisted technologies while maintaining the principles of research integrity, authorship, originality, transparency, confidentiality, and accountability.

This policy applies to the use of AI and Generative AI tools in manuscript preparation, research activities, data analysis, image generation or modification, peer review, editorial work, and other stages of the publication process.

1. General Principles

IJPRMS permits the responsible use of AI-assisted technologies provided that such use does not compromise the originality, accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, or ethical standards of scholarly work.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and other contributors remain fully responsible for the content and decisions associated with their work. AI tools cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, or ethical conduct of a manuscript and therefore cannot be considered authors or co-authors.

AI-generated or AI-assisted content must be carefully reviewed and verified by humans because AI systems may produce inaccurate, incomplete, biased, fabricated, or misleading information.

2. Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted technologies for limited and appropriate purposes, such as:

Language improvement, grammar correction, spelling, and readability.

Assistance with manuscript organization or formatting.

Assistance with brainstorming or developing ideas.

Translation or language-related assistance.

Assistance with coding or programming, provided that the resulting code and outputs are independently verified.

Assistance with data analysis, where the use of the AI system is scientifically appropriate, transparently reported, and independently validated.

The use of AI must not replace the authors' intellectual contribution, scientific judgment, responsibility, or accountability for the research.

Authors remain responsible for:

The accuracy and integrity of all submitted information.

Verification of AI-generated statements, references, calculations, and interpretations.

Ensuring that appropriate sources are cited.

Ensuring that the manuscript does not contain plagiarism or unattributed material.

Obtaining necessary permissions for copyrighted or third-party material.

Ensuring that AI-generated content does not introduce fabricated data, unsupported claims, or misleading conclusions.

3. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of AI-assisted technologies when AI has contributed substantively to the preparation, analysis, generation, or presentation of the manuscript.

The disclosure should identify:

The name of the AI tool or technology used.

The purpose for which it was used.

The part of the manuscript, research, analysis, or figures in which it was used.

Where appropriate, the version or date of the AI tool.

For example:

AI Use Disclosure: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [describe purpose, e.g., language editing and grammar improvement]. The authors reviewed and verified all AI-assisted content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.

If AI was used for data analysis, research methodology, coding, figure generation, or other substantive research activities, the authors should provide appropriate details in the Methods, Acknowledgments, or another relevant section of the manuscript.

Current ICMJE guidance recommends that authors disclose AI-assisted technologies used in the production of submitted work and explain how they were used.

4. AI Cannot Be an Author or Co-Author

AI systems, chatbots, Generative AI tools, and LLMs must not be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS.

Authorship requires human responsibility for the work, including responsibility for its accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical compliance. AI systems cannot fulfill these responsibilities.

Authors should not:

List ChatGPT or another AI system as an author or co-author.

Attribute authorship to an AI system.

Present AI-generated content as the independent intellectual contribution of a named human author without appropriate disclosure.

Use AI-generated material to falsely represent the originality or authorship of scholarly work.

This principle is consistent with current ICMJE recommendations.

5. AI-Generated Text and Manuscript Content

The use of Generative AI to produce substantial portions of a manuscript must be disclosed.

Authors must critically evaluate and revise any AI-assisted text before submission. AI-generated text must not be accepted without human verification.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that:

Statements are factually correct.

Scientific interpretations are supported by evidence.

References actually exist and accurately support the cited claims.

No fabricated citations or sources are included.

No copyrighted or unattributed material has been improperly reproduced.

The final manuscript accurately represents the authors' research and conclusions.

AI-generated text should not be used to fabricate scientific observations, experimental findings, clinical information, or research conclusions.

6. AI-Generated or AI-Assisted Images

AI-generated or AI-assisted images, illustrations, graphical abstracts, diagrams, or other visual materials must comply with the journal's requirements for scientific integrity and image presentation.

Authors must disclose the use of AI when it has been used to generate, substantially modify, or manipulate an image.

AI must not be used to:

Fabricate experimental results or scientific evidence.

Add, remove, or alter research findings in a misleading manner.

Manipulate clinical, microscopic, radiographic, electrophoretic, photographic, or other scientific images in a way that changes their interpretation.

Create images that falsely represent experimental observations.

Misrepresent an AI-generated illustration as an actual experimental result.

Where AI-assisted image generation or modification has been used, authors should describe the tool and the nature of the modification in the appropriate section of the manuscript.

7. AI and Research Data

AI tools may be used for research-related data processing or analysis only when scientifically appropriate and when their use is fully disclosed.

Authors must independently verify AI-assisted analyses and remain responsible for the accuracy of the resulting data and conclusions.

AI must not be used to:

Generate fabricated experimental data.

Invent participants, observations, measurements, or clinical outcomes.

Alter or manipulate research data.

Create false statistical results.

Select or modify data solely to produce a desired conclusion.

Generate misleading tables or figures presented as actual research findings.

Any intentional use of AI to fabricate, manipulate, or misrepresent research data may be considered research misconduct or publication misconduct and may result in appropriate editorial action.

8. AI and References

Authors are responsible for verifying every reference included in a manuscript.

AI-generated references must not be accepted without independent verification.

Authors must ensure that:

Every cited reference is genuine.

The cited article actually supports the statement for which it is cited.

Bibliographic information is accurate.

Appropriate original sources are cited where available.

AI-generated material should not be used as a substitute for appropriate primary scientific literature.

9. AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must protect the confidentiality of manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS.

Reviewers must not upload, paste, or otherwise transfer confidential manuscript content, figures, data, reviewer reports, or unpublished information into publicly accessible or third-party AI systems unless such use has been explicitly permitted by the journal and confidentiality can be assured.

Reviewers must not use AI tools to independently generate or submit a peer review without appropriate authorization.

If AI is permitted for assistance during peer review, reviewers remain responsible for:

Maintaining manuscript confidentiality.

Verifying the accuracy of any AI-assisted output.

Providing an independent and objective evaluation.

Disclosing their use of AI to the editorial office when required.

Current ICMJE guidance emphasizes that manuscript confidentiality may prohibit uploading submitted manuscripts to AI systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.

10. AI Use by Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff may use AI-assisted technologies only in ways that are consistent with confidentiality, publication ethics, and the journal's editorial responsibilities.

Editors and editorial staff must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished material into AI systems where confidentiality cannot be adequately protected.

Where AI is used for editorial or production purposes, the editorial team remains responsible for verifying the accuracy, appropriateness, and integrity of the resulting content.

Editors must not allow AI-generated recommendations or outputs to replace independent editorial judgment.

11. Confidentiality and Protection of Unpublished Work

Manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS are confidential scholarly documents.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must protect unpublished manuscripts and associated information from unauthorized disclosure.

The use of AI systems that retain, process, or reuse submitted manuscript content may create confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, or data-security concerns. Therefore, confidential manuscript information must not be entered into AI systems unless the journal has expressly permitted such use and adequate confidentiality safeguards are in place.

12. Plagiarism, Copyright, and Intellectual Property

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content does not infringe copyright, intellectual property rights, privacy rights, or other legal rights.

The use of AI does not exempt authors from the journal's plagiarism and originality requirements.

Authors must:

Properly attribute sources.

Obtain permission where required.

Avoid reproducing copyrighted material without authorization.

Verify AI-generated quotations and references.

Ensure that the submitted work represents an original and appropriately attributed scholarly contribution.

AI-generated content must not be used as a means of concealing plagiarism or unauthorized reproduction of another person's work.

13. Undisclosed or Misleading Use of AI

Failure to disclose substantive AI use, when disclosure is required under this policy, may lead to editorial inquiry.

Depending on the circumstances, undisclosed or misleading use of AI may result in:

A request for clarification or disclosure.

Correction of the published article.

Reassessment of the manuscript.

Rejection or withdrawal of the manuscript.

Retraction of a published article.

Notification of the authors' institution or other appropriate authority where serious misconduct is suspected.

ICMJE notes that nondisclosure of AI use may require corrective action and, in some circumstances, may be considered misconduct.

14. Responsibility of Authors

The corresponding author and all listed authors are responsible for ensuring compliance with this policy.

By submitting a manuscript to IJPRMS, authors confirm that:

All authors have reviewed and approved the submitted manuscript.

Any required use of AI-assisted technologies has been disclosed.

AI has not been listed as an author or co-author.

AI-generated information has been appropriately verified.

The manuscript contains no intentionally fabricated data, references, images, or scientific claims.

The authors accept full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of the submitted work.

15. Policy Updates

IJPRMS may periodically revise this policy to reflect developments in artificial intelligence, research practices, publication ethics, copyright requirements, data protection, and recommendations from recognized organizations.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff are expected to comply with the version of the policy applicable at the time of their participation in the publication process.

Suggested AI Disclosure Statement for Authors

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies: The authors declare that [name of AI tool] was used during the preparation of this manuscript for [describe purpose]. All AI-assisted content was critically reviewed, verified, and edited by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.

No AI Use Statement

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies: The authors declare that no Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies were used in the preparation, analysis, or generation of this manuscript, except for routine software functions that do not generate substantive scholarly content.

1. Purpose

The International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Medical Sciences (IJPRMS) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly quality, research integrity, transparency, fairness, and ethical publication practices. The Editorial Board and peer reviewers play a central role in maintaining the scientific quality and credibility of the journal.

This policy establishes the roles, responsibilities, eligibility requirements, ethical standards, confidentiality requirements, conflict-of-interest provisions, and professional expectations applicable to Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers of IJPRMS.

The policy applies to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Section Editors, Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors, and individuals invited to review manuscripts submitted to IJPRMS.

2. Composition of the Editorial Board

The Editorial Board of IJPRMS may include:

The composition of the Editorial Board should reflect appropriate expertise across the pharmaceutical, medical, clinical, biomedical, life-science, and related disciplines covered by the journal.

IJPRMS aims to maintain an editorial team with appropriate academic qualifications, research experience, subject expertise, institutional diversity, geographical diversity, and professional independence.

3. Eligibility for Editorial Board Membership

Editorial Board Members should normally:

Hold an appropriate academic or professional qualification relevant to the scope of IJPRMS.

Have demonstrated research, academic, clinical, or professional expertise in a relevant discipline.

Have an established scholarly publication record appropriate to their career stage and field.

Demonstrate knowledge of research and publication ethics.

Be willing and able to undertake editorial responsibilities in a timely and professional manner.

Maintain confidentiality regarding manuscripts and editorial correspondence.

Declare and appropriately manage any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

Support the journal's commitment to academic integrity and responsible publishing.

Act independently and make editorial recommendations based on scholarly merit rather than personal, institutional, commercial, political, or other interests.

Comply with the policies and procedures of IJPRMS.

Appointment to the Editorial Board does not guarantee publication of an individual's work in the journal.

4. Appointment of Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board Members are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief or the authorized editorial leadership of IJPRMS based on academic expertise, professional experience, research contribution, subject relevance, ethical standing, and the current needs of the journal.

Before appointment, the journal may consider:

Appointments should be based on professional qualifications and should not be made solely on the basis of personal relationships, institutional status, or commercial considerations.

5. Term of Appointment

Editorial Board appointments may be made for a defined period determined by the journal.

Appointments may be renewed following an evaluation of:

The journal may revise the composition of its Editorial Board when necessary to maintain an effective, balanced, and active editorial structure.

6. Responsibilities of Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board Members are expected to:

Promote the scientific and ethical standards of IJPRMS.

Evaluate manuscripts objectively and impartially when assigned.

Recommend appropriate reviewers with relevant expertise.

Assess reviewer reports and provide appropriate editorial recommendations.

Identify potential ethical concerns in submitted manuscripts.

Maintain strict confidentiality concerning manuscripts and editorial discussions.

Declare conflicts of interest before participating in editorial decisions.

Avoid using unpublished information obtained through editorial work for personal or professional advantage.

Treat authors and reviewers respectfully and professionally.

Assist the Editor-in-Chief in maintaining the quality and relevance of the journal.

Participate in editorial meetings or consultations when requested.

Remain familiar with developments in publication ethics and research integrity.

Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, authorship disputes, or other forms of misconduct to the appropriate editorial authority.

Avoid discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, seniority, or other irrelevant characteristics.

Make recommendations based on the scientific quality, originality, relevance, clarity, and validity of the manuscript.

7. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must be based primarily on the scholarly and ethical merits of submitted manuscripts.

Editorial Board Members must not allow:

to improperly influence editorial decisions.

The journal's editorial process should remain independent from commercial or advertising considerations.

8. Editorial Decision-Making

Editorial decisions may consider:

Acceptance of a manuscript should not be based solely on positive or negative results.

The Editor-in-Chief retains final responsibility for editorial decisions unless formally delegated according to the journal's editorial structure.

9. Conflicts of Interest for Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board Members must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.

A conflict may arise from:

An Editorial Board Member with a significant conflict of interest must not participate in the editorial evaluation or decision-making process for the affected manuscript.

The manuscript should be reassigned to an appropriately independent editor whenever necessary.

10. Confidentiality

Editorial Board Members must treat all submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, editorial discussions, and unpublished information as confidential.

Editorial materials must not be:

Editors must not disclose the identity of authors or reviewers where a journal's review model requires anonymity.

11. Use of Artificial Intelligence by Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board Members must use artificial intelligence and automated tools responsibly.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscript content, unpublished data, figures, tables, reviewer reports, or other protected editorial materials into external AI systems when doing so could compromise confidentiality or intellectual property.

AI tools must not replace the editor's professional judgment.

Editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the designated human editor.

AI-generated recommendations or text must be critically evaluated for accuracy, bias, fabricated references, confidentiality risks, and ethical concerns.

12. Editorial Misconduct

Editorial misconduct may include:

Allegations of editorial misconduct will be assessed fairly and confidentially by the appropriate journal authority.

13. Performance and Participation

Editorial Board Members are expected to remain reasonably active.

Performance may be assessed based on:

The journal may review or discontinue an appointment where an Editorial Board Member is consistently inactive or fails to meet the journal's ethical and professional expectations.

14. Resignation or Removal

An Editorial Board Member may resign by notifying the Editor-in-Chief.

The journal may terminate an appointment in cases involving:

Where appropriate, the individual will be given an opportunity to respond before a final decision is made.

15. Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review at IJPRMS is intended to provide an independent scholarly assessment of submitted manuscripts and to assist editors in making informed editorial decisions.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, confidentially, and within the agreed timeframe.

Peer review is an advisory process. The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's authorized editor.

16. Selection of Peer Reviewers

Reviewers may be selected based on:

The journal may use appropriate databases, professional networks, editorial recommendations, author suggestions, or other legitimate sources to identify potential reviewers.

Suggested reviewers may be considered but are not necessarily selected.

The journal may use more than one reviewer to obtain independent assessments of a manuscript.

17. Reviewer Qualifications

Reviewers should possess appropriate expertise relevant to the manuscript being evaluated.

Reviewers should:

Have sufficient knowledge of the subject area.

Be able to provide an independent assessment.

Understand basic principles of research and publication ethics.

Have no significant conflict of interest with the manuscript or authors.

Be able to complete the review within the requested timeframe.

Provide constructive and evidence-based comments.

Early-career researchers may serve as reviewers when they have appropriate subject expertise and, where necessary, suitable guidance or supervision.

18. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers should:

Evaluate manuscripts objectively.

Assess scientific validity and methodological soundness.

Consider whether the conclusions are supported by the presented evidence.

Identify important omissions or weaknesses.

Comment on clarity and organization where relevant.

Identify inappropriate, insufficient, or misleading references.

Identify possible plagiarism or substantial overlap when reasonably detectable.

Identify apparent fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, or other research-integrity concerns.

Provide clear and constructive recommendations.

Distinguish major scientific concerns from minor editorial suggestions.

Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

Submit the review within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers should not rewrite a manuscript in a manner that imposes their own scientific opinions where the authors' approach is scientifically valid.

19. Reviewer Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

Share manuscripts with colleagues or students without permission from the editor.

Discuss unpublished findings with others.

Copy substantial portions of the manuscript.

Use unpublished information for personal research or competitive advantage.

Contact authors directly regarding the manuscript unless specifically authorized by the journal.

Reviewer identities will be handled according to the journal's stated peer-review model.

20. Conflict of Interest for Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest before accepting an assignment.

Potential conflicts include:

If a significant conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the assignment.

A reviewer should not accept a manuscript merely because the topic is personally interesting if an actual conflict prevents objective assessment.

21. Reviewer Use of Artificial Intelligence

Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of manuscripts when using AI tools.

Reviewers should not upload confidential manuscripts, unpublished research findings, tables, figures, datasets, reviewer reports, or other protected content into publicly available AI systems unless the journal expressly permits such use and adequate confidentiality protections are in place.

AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly judgment.

A reviewer remains responsible for the accuracy, relevance, and integrity of the submitted review.

Reviewers must not use AI to generate an entire peer-review report without meaningful human assessment.

If AI assistance is permitted by the journal, reviewers should critically verify AI-generated content, particularly references, scientific claims, methodological assessments, and interpretations.

22. Reviewer Assessment Criteria

Reviewers should consider, as applicable:

Is the research question clearly defined?

Is the study scientifically relevant?

Are the methods appropriate?

Are the experimental or clinical procedures adequately described?

Are the results presented clearly?

Are the conclusions supported by the evidence?

Does the manuscript provide a meaningful contribution?

Is the work sufficiently original?

Does it add useful knowledge to the existing literature?

Is the study design appropriate?

Are controls appropriate?

Are sample sizes justified where applicable?

Are statistical methods appropriate?

Are limitations adequately acknowledged?

Where applicable, reviewers should check whether the manuscript appears to address:

Reviewers should alert the editor to apparent ethical deficiencies rather than attempting to resolve them independently with the authors.

Reviewers may comment on:

Language issues should generally be distinguished from substantive scientific weaknesses.

23. Structure of Reviewer Reports

A reviewer report should preferably contain:

Reviewer comments should be professional, specific, evidence-based, and constructive.

Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

24. Reviewer Recommendations

Depending on the journal's editorial system, reviewers may recommend:

The recommendation is advisory and does not determine the final editorial decision.

A reviewer should explain the basis for the recommendation through appropriate comments.

25. Timeliness

Reviewers should accept an assignment only when they reasonably expect to complete it within the requested period.

If additional time is required, the reviewer should contact the editorial office as soon as possible.

If a reviewer cannot complete the review, they should decline the assignment promptly so that the editorial process is not unnecessarily delayed.

26. Reviewer Recognition

IJPRMS may acknowledge the contribution of reviewers through appropriate mechanisms, provided that confidentiality and reviewer anonymity are preserved.

The journal may provide certificates or other formal recognition for completed peer-review assignments at its discretion.

Reviewer recognition must not compromise the confidentiality of the peer-review process.

27. Reviewer Misconduct

Reviewer misconduct may include:

The journal may suspend or permanently discontinue a reviewer's participation when serious misconduct is established.

28. Ethical Concerns Identified During Review

If a reviewer suspects:

the reviewer should confidentially notify the editor and provide sufficient information to support the concern.

Reviewers should not publicly accuse authors of misconduct or contact third parties independently.

29. Reviewer–Author Communication

Unless expressly authorized by IJPRMS, reviewers should not contact authors directly about manuscripts under review.

All substantive communication concerning the manuscript should occur through the editorial office.

Reviewers should not reveal their identity to authors when the journal is operating a blinded review model.

30. Independence and Fairness

Reviewers must assess manuscripts solely on relevant scholarly criteria.

Reviewers must not discriminate against authors because of:

Reviewers should focus on the scientific quality and relevance of the work.

31. Reviewer Citation Requests

Reviewers should recommend additional references only when they are genuinely relevant to improving the scientific quality or completeness of the manuscript.

Reviewers must not request citations primarily to:

32. Appeals and Editorial Disagreements

Reviewers may communicate concerns about editorial decisions through the editorial office where appropriate.

Reviewers should respect the final editorial decision after the review process has been completed.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions according to the journal's separate Appeals and Complaints Policy.

33. Training and Guidance

IJPRMS encourages reviewers and Editorial Board Members to remain informed about developments in:

The journal may provide guidance, educational materials, or reviewer instructions to support consistent and high-quality peer review.

34. Accountability

All Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers are expected to act in accordance with recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing and the policies published by IJPRMS.

Failure to comply with this policy may result in:

Serious cases may be referred to the relevant institution or appropriate authority when necessary.

35. Final Statement

IJPRMS recognizes that high-quality peer review and responsible editorial management are essential to maintaining the credibility of scholarly publishing. The journal therefore expects all Editorial Board Members and Peer Reviewers to perform their responsibilities with integrity, independence, confidentiality, fairness, professionalism, and respect for authors and fellow researchers. The journal reserves the right to periodically update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research ethics, peer-review practices, and applicable standards.