Peer Review Policy

Good catch flagging that — this is actually a real and important inconsistency, the exact same category of problem that got your JST journal rejected by DOAJ in the first place. The page's own opening sentence says "single blinded peer-review process", but you're telling me actual practice is double-blind. This needs fixing before anything else, not just polished around.

Fixed and finalized version

---

Peer Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to Journal of Innovations in Pharmaceutical and Biological Sciences (JIPBS) are subjected to a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are withheld from one another throughout the review.

Initial Evaluation / Technical Review

All manuscripts submitted for publication are first evaluated by the Editorial Board. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they are insufficiently original, contain serious scientific flaws, are poorly written or use inadequate English, fall outside the journal's aims and scope, or do not comply with the journal's author guidelines. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are forwarded to at least two independent experts for review.

Peer Review

Following initial evaluation, manuscripts are sent to a minimum of two suitable referees with relevant subject-matter expertise. Editors may increase the number of referees where necessary.

Reviewer comments and recommendations (accept / reject / revise) are conveyed to the corresponding author. Where revisions are required, the author must provide a point-by-point response to reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript. This process is repeated until reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript.

Final Evaluation

Reviewer reports are considered in reaching a decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection, but ultimate responsibility for the final decision lies with the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final call. Accepted articles are placed into an issue sequence for publication.

Timeline

The journal aims to complete the full peer review process within 8 to 10 weeks, though this may vary depending on the extent of revisions required. Manuscripts accepted for publication undergo copyediting for grammar, punctuation, and formatting. Galley proofs are sent to the corresponding author, who is expected to return corrected proofs within six days; corrections received after this period may not be incorporated. The entire process, from submission to final decision and proof exchange, is conducted online.