Peer Review Process and Evaluation Policy

Food and Pharma International is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of scientific excellence, editorial integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing practices. All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous editorial evaluation and peer review process designed to ensure originality, scientific validity, methodological rigour, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s interdisciplinary scope. The journal adheres to internationally recognized principles of scholarly publishing and follows the recommendations and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Upon submission, each manuscript is initially assessed by the Editorial Office and the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor to determine its suitability for further consideration. During this preliminary evaluation, manuscripts are examined for compliance with the aims and scope of the journal, adherence to manuscript preparation and formatting requirements, scientific quality and originality, ethical standards, language clarity, and overall presentation. The editorial assessment also verifies the inclusion of essential elements such as ethical approval statements, informed consent where applicable, funding disclosures, and conflict of interest declarations. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s minimum scientific, technical, or ethical requirements may either be returned to the authors for technical correction or rejected without external peer review. Such desk rejections may result from insufficient novelty, poor methodological quality, ethical concerns, inadequate scientific relevance, or substantial deficiencies in presentation.

To preserve academic integrity and originality, all submitted manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software prior to peer review. Manuscripts identified as containing plagiarism, excessive textual similarity, duplicate publication, redundant or salami publication, fabricated or falsified data, manipulated images, or other forms of scientific misconduct may be rejected immediately and handled in accordance with accepted publication ethics guidelines. The journal reserves the right to undertake further investigations when serious ethical concerns are identified.

Editorial decisions are made independently and exclusively on the basis of scientific merit, methodological soundness, research integrity, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal. Editorial evaluations are conducted without discrimination regarding authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, race, ethnicity, political beliefs, or religious background. Commercial interests and external influences shall not affect editorial judgment under any circumstances.

The journal operates a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. This model is intended to promote impartiality, fairness, and objective scientific evaluation. Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers possessing appropriate academic qualifications and research expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their scientific knowledge, publication record, reviewing experience, professional reputation, and absence of conflicts of interest. Editors avoid appointing reviewers who may have personal, institutional, collaborative, competitive, or financial relationships that could compromise the objectivity of the review process.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and constructively while maintaining strict confidentiality regarding all manuscript content and associated materials. Reviewers are encouraged to provide clear, evidence-based scientific comments and recommendations that assist both the editors and authors in improving the quality of the work. Personal criticism is considered inappropriate and unacceptable. Reviewers are also responsible for identifying relevant published literature not cited by the authors and for reporting any suspected plagiarism, ethical misconduct, duplicate publication, data irregularities, or scientific fraud. In addition, reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may influence their evaluation.

During peer review, manuscripts are assessed according to multiple scientific and editorial criteria, including originality and novelty, scientific significance, methodological rigor, appropriateness of study design, statistical validity, ethical compliance, clarity of presentation, adequacy of literature review and references, reliability of data interpretation, validity of conclusions, and overall contribution to scientific knowledge in food science, pharmaceutical sciences, nutrition, biotechnology, biomedical sciences, therapeutics, toxicology, public health, and related interdisciplinary fields.

Based on the reviewers’ evaluations, manuscripts may receive one of several recommendations, including acceptance without revision, acceptance with minor revision, major revision, or rejection. The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor after careful consideration of reviewer comments, scientific quality, ethical standards, and the journal’s editorial priorities. Editorial decisions are considered final.

Authors requested to revise their manuscripts are expected to submit a revised version accompanied by a detailed point-by-point response addressing each reviewer's and editorial comment. All revisions and modifications should be clearly explained and appropriately incorporated into the manuscript. Failure to adequately address reviewer concerns may result in rejection of the submission. When necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation and confirmation that concerns have been satisfactorily resolved.

The journal recognizes the importance of transparency and accountability in scholarly publishing and therefore provides authors with the opportunity to appeal editorial decisions. Appeals must be submitted formally to the editorial office and should include detailed scientific justification, responses to reviewer comments, and supporting evidence for reconsideration. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, when appropriate, by independent editorial advisors. Complaints related to editorial conduct, peer review procedures, ethical concerns, or publication misconduct are managed in accordance with accepted ethical publishing standards and COPE recommendations.

Throughout the editorial and peer review process, the journal maintains strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts and related communications. Editors, reviewers, editorial staff, and publishing personnel are prohibited from disclosing manuscript information to unauthorized individuals. Confidential materials may only be shared with individuals directly involved in the editorial and publication process when necessary.

The journal also maintains comprehensive ethical oversight during manuscript evaluation and reserves the right to investigate concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, unethical research practices, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or deficiencies in ethical approval documentation. In cases involving serious research misconduct or ethical violations, the journal may contact the authors’ institutions, ethics committees, regulatory bodies, or funding agencies for further investigation or clarification.

Editors and reviewers are required to disclose all actual or potential conflicts of interest, including financial relationships, institutional affiliations, collaborative associations, academic competition, or personal relationships that could influence editorial judgment or peer review objectivity. Individuals with identified conflicts of interest shall not participate in editorial decisions or manuscript evaluation.

Food and Pharma International strives to ensure a timely, efficient, and transparent review process. Although review timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the extent of revisions required, the editorial office endeavors to complete the initial review process within a reasonable timeframe. Authors are regularly informed about the status and progress of their manuscripts during editorial evaluation and peer review.

The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record after publication. If errors, ethical concerns, or scientific inaccuracies are identified following publication, the journal may issue corrections, errata, expressions of concern, or retractions as appropriate. All post-publication actions are conducted in accordance with internationally accepted publication ethics standards and COPE guidance to ensure transparency, accountability, and scientific integrity in scholarly communication.