Lahore Journal of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (LJPHS)

Editorial and Peer Review Process

LJPHS maintains a strict, transparent double-blind peer-review workflow managed via our Open Journal System (OJS) to ensure the highest standards of scientific rigor and publication integrity.

1Initial Screening

Upon submission, the editorial team conducts a technical screening to verify complete files, formatting, and similarity index using Turnitin.

2Desk Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief assesses the manuscript's suitability, scientific quality, and alignment with the journal's scope.

3External Review

Eligible manuscripts are blinded and assigned to at least two independent peer reviewers (including regional and international experts).

4Turnaround Time

The journal strives to provide the first decision within 6 to 8 weeks of initial submission.

Editorial Decision Outcomes

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief renders one of the following official decisions:

Accept Without Changes

Manuscript is accepted in its current form.

Minor Revisions

Authors are given 14 days to update the manuscript based on specific feedback.

Major Revisions

Authors must address critical flaws and re-submit for a second review round.

Reject

The paper is not suitable or contains irrecoverable flaws.

Guidelines for Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining scientific standards. We ask our reviewers to adhere strictly to the following ethical and procedural guidelines:

Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, share, or discuss any part of the manuscript with outside parties or utilize the research findings for their own work before publication.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must decline reviews if they have a conflict of interest, such as recent collaborations with the authors, competing research, or financial interests.
Objectivity & Constructive Feedback: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Feedback should be constructive, clear, and backed by scientific reasoning to help the authors improve their work.
Plagiarism & Integrity Alert: Reviewers should alert the editors if they suspect any research misconduct, duplicate publication, data manipulation, or potential plagiarism.
Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluation within the agreed-upon timeframe (typically 3 to 4 weeks). If an extension is needed, please notify the editorial office immediately.

Guidelines for Editors

LJPHS editors carry the ultimate responsibility for the quality, integrity, and ethical standards of all published material.

Editorial Independence & Fairness Editors must evaluate manuscripts objectively based on scientific merit, relevance, and originality, without regard to the authors' race, gender, institutional affiliation, or nationality.
Handling Conflicts of Interest Editors must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript where they have a conflict of interest (e.g., if written by a colleague in their immediate department or a recent collaborator).
Decision-Making Responsibility While editors rely heavily on reviewer feedback, the final decision to accept or reject rests with the Editor-in-Chief. No accepted paper may be overturned unless ethical violations are proven.

Confidentiality & Double-Blind Integrity Editors must ensure that the identity of both authors and reviewers is kept strictly confidential. No details about the review process or reviewer communications should be disclosed.
Ethical Vigilance Editors must actively investigate potential research misconduct or plagiarism using COPE guidelines. They have the authority to desk-reject papers that violate similarity indices or ethical protocols.

Editorial & Peer Review Process