ONLINE MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION
Authors are requested to electronically submit their papers to this journal for evaluation and submission at https://bentham.manuscriptpoint.com/ View Submission Instructions. The Manuscript Processing System (MPS) has been designed with the objective of ensuring step-by-step online processing and tracking of manuscripts for authors, editors and the publisher from submission to acceptance and final reproduction.
hrough the submission process, this website will guide authors through each stage. The text, tables, and artwork should be uploaded at (https://bentham.manuscriptpoint.com) in electronic format by the authors. However, the authors who are unable to provide an electronic version or who are facing other difficulties must contact the editorial office by emailing email@example.com to discuss any alternatives. Submissions that do not adhere to these guidelines will unfortunately not be taken into consideration.
Manuscripts must be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript, and should not be submitted by anyone on their behalf. The principal/corresponding author will be required to submit a Copyright Letter along with the manuscript, on behalf of all the co-authors (if any). The author(s) will confirm that the manuscript (or any part of it) has not been published previously or is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Furthermore, any illustration, structure or table that has been published elsewhere must be reported, and copyright permission for reproduction must be obtained.
For all online submissions, please provide soft copies of all the materials (main text in MS Word or Tex/LaTeX), figures/illustrations in TIFF, PDF or JPEG, and chemical structures drawn in ChemDraw (CDX)/ISISDraw (TGF) as separate files, while a PDF version of the entire manuscript must also be included, embedded with all the figures/illustrations/tables/chemical structures etc. It is advisable that the document files related to a manuscript submission should always have the name of the corresponding author as part of the file name, i.e., Cilli MS text.doc, “Cilli MS Figure 1, etc.
It is imperative that before submission, authors should carefully proofread the files for special characters, mathematical symbols, Greek letters, equations, tables references and images, to ensure that they appear in proper format. References, figures, tables, structures, etc. should be referred in the text at the places where they are discussed first. Figure legends/captions should also provided.
A successful electronic submission of a manuscript will be followed by a system-generated acknowledgement to the principal/corresponding author. Any queries therein should be addressed to firstname.lastname@example.org
The journal publishes peer-reviewed full-length review articles, research papers and drug clinical trial studies written in English. Single topic/thematic issues may also be considered for publication.
Single Topic Issues
These special issues are peer-reviewed and may contain invited or uninvited review/mini-review articles. A Single Topic Issue Editor will offer a short perspective and co-ordinate the solicitation of manuscripts between 3-5 (for a mini-thematic issue) to 6-10 (for a full-length thematic issue) from leading scientists. Authors interested in editing a single topic issue in an emerging field of outstanding developments in neurovascular and drug clinical trial studies may submit their proposal to the Editor-in-Chief at email@example.com for consideration.
For proposals to publish conference proceedings in this journal, please contact us at email firstname.lastname@example.org for consideration.
The length of a published comprehensive review article is from 6000-10000 words with 100 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.
Mini-reviews should be 3000- 6000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.
Systematic Reviews include systematic updates on review protocols, methods, research and results from all relevant fields for any studies and updates on already published issues. The total number of words for a published systematic review is from 4000 to 6000 words with 100 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables etc. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines; (www.prisma-statement.org).
Registration of Systematic Reviews
Bentham Science Publishers supports retrospective registration of systematic reviews, in a suitable registry (such as PROSPERO). The registered systematic review must include the registration number as the last line of the manuscript abstract.
Research articles should be of 4000-6000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.
Randomized Drug Clinical Trial Studies
Trial studies should be 4000 to 6000 words with 50 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables etc.
Editorials are short papers on important topics related to the journal. The total number of words in an editorial should not exceed 1000 to 1500, and it should contain only 10-15 references. An abstract is not required.
Commentaries present an analysis by scientists on different important issues related to the publications in the journal. Commentaries should contain less than 3000 words, including the abstract, main text, references, and figure legends. However, an abstract is not necessary.
A perspective provides a short overview of a research topic relevant to the field. The length of a published perspective ranges from 1500 to 1800 words, with 20 or more references, excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.
Industry News should provide important developments in industries related to the scope of the Journal, that could be of interest to the readers. The length of the submission should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).
Patent News may present important information about recent important patents that have been granted, relevant to the scope of this journal. The length should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).
There is no restriction on the number of figures, tables or additional files e.g. video clips, animation and datasets, that can be included with each article online. Authors should include all relevant supporting data with each article (Refer to Supplementary Material section).
The manuscript should be written in English in a clear, direct and active style. All pages must be numbered sequentially, facilitating in the reviewing and editing of the manuscript.
MICROSOFT WORD TEMPLATE
It is advisable that authors prepare their manuscript using the template available on the Web, which will assist in preparation of the manuscript according to journal’s format. Download the Template.
SECTIONS IN MANUSCRIPTS
Manuscripts submitted for research and review articles in the journal should be divided into the following sections:
List of Abbreviations (if any)
Consent for Publication
Conflict of Interest
Figures/Illustrations (if any)
Chemical Structures (if any)
Tables (if any)
Supportive/Supplementary Material (if any)
The title of the article should be precise and brief and must not be more than 120 characters. Authors should avoid the use of non-standard abbreviations and question marks in titles. The first letter of each word should be in capital letters except for articles, conjunctions and prepositions.
As recommended by the Reporting guidelines information about the study should be a part of the title (particularly for randomized or clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta analyses).
Authors should also provide a short 'running title with no more than 80 characters'. Title, running title, byline, correspondent footnote, and keywords should be written as presented in the original manuscript.
Title page should include paper title, author(s) full name and affiliation, corresponding author(s) names complete affiliation/address, along with phone, fax and email.
The abstract of an article should be its clear, concise and accurate summary, having no more than 250 words, and including the explicit sub-headings (as in-line or run-in headings in bold). Use of abbreviations should be avoided and the references should not be cited in the abstract.
All the original research articles, systematic reviews and meta analyses must be accompanied with a structured abstract. Ideally, each abstract should include the following sub-headings, but these may vary according to requirements of the article.
The headings can vary, but must state the purpose of the study, details of the participants, measurements, methods, main findings and conclusion.
The clinical trial studies should have the registration number at the end of the study.
A graphic should be included when possible with each manuscript for use in the Table of Contents (TOC). This must be submitted separately as an electronic file (preferred file types are EPS, PDF, TIFF, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint and CDX etc.). A graphical abstract, not exceeding 30 words along with the illustration, helps to summarize the contents of the manuscript in a concise pictorial form. It is meant as an aid for the rapid viewing of the journals' contents and to help capture the readers’ attention. The graphical abstract may feature a key structure, reaction, equation, etc. that the manuscript elucidates upon. It will be listed along with the manuscript title, authors’ names and affiliations in the contents page, typeset within an area of 5 cm by 17 cm, but it will not appear in the article's PDF file or print.
Graphical Abstracts should be submitted as a separate file (must clearly mention graphical abstract within the file) online via Bentham's Manuscript Processing System (MPS).
You can view a few examples of the Graphical Abstracts on our website.
6 to 8 keywords must be provided. Choose important and relevant keywords that researchers in your field will be searching for so that your paper will appear in a database search. The keywords should be contained in the title and they should appear several times in the article. In biomedical fields, MeSH terms are a good ‘common vocabulary’ source to draw keywords from https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html.
The main text should begin on a separate page and should be divided into title page, abstract and the main text. The text may be subdivided further according to the areas to be discussed, which should be followed by the List of Abbreviations, Conflict of Interest, Acknowledgements and Reference sections. For review, the manuscript should be divided into title page, abstract and the main text. The Review Article should mention any previous important recent and old reviews in the field and contain a comprehensive discussion starting with the general background of the field. It should then go on to discuss the salient features of recent developments. The authors should avoid presenting material which has already been published in a previous review. The authors are advised to present and discuss their observations in brief.
For Research Articles the manuscript should begin with the title page and abstract followed by the main text, which must be structured into separate sections as Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate, Human and Animal Rights, Conflict of Interest, Acknowledgements and References.
All randomized clinical trials must include a flow diagram and authors should provide a completed randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol.
The manuscript style must be uniform throughout the text and 10 pt Times New Roman font should be used. The full term for an abbreviation should precede its first appearance in the text unless it is a standard unit of measurement. The reference numbers should be given in square brackets in the text. Italics should be used for Binomial names of organisms (Genus and Species), for emphasis and for unfamiliar words or phrases. Non-assimilated words from Latin or other languages should also be italicized e.g. per se, et al. etc.
Section headings should be numbered sequentially, left aligned and have the first letter capitalized, starting with the introduction. Sub-section headings however, should be in lower-case and italicized with their initials capitalized. They should be numbered as 1.1, 1.2, etc.
The Introduction section should include the background and aims of the research in a comprehensive manner.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This section provides details of the methodology used along with information on any previous efforts with corresponding references. Any details for further modifications and research should be included. Sufficient details should be provided to the reader about the original data source in order to enable the analysis, appropriateness and verification of the results reported in the study.
It is important for the Methods Section should be sufficiently detailed in respect of the data presented, and the results produced from it. This section should include all the information and protocol gathered for the study at the time when it was being written. If the study is funded or financially supported by an organization to conduct the research, then it should be mentioned in the Methods Section. Methods must be result-oriented. The statement regarding the approval by an independent local, regional or national review committee (e.g. name of ethic committee and institutional review board) should be part of the Methods Section.
Repeated information should not be reported in the text of an article. A calculation section must include experimental data, facts and practical development from a theoretical perspective.
Results should be precise.
This should explore the significance of the results of the work, present a reproducible procedure and emphasis the importance of the article in the light of recent developments in the field. Extensive citations and discussion of published literature should be avoided.
This section of research articles should discuss the implications of the findings in the context of existing research and highlight the study's limitations. The authors should justify the sample size according to the study purpose and methods.
The Results and Discussion may be presented together under one heading of “Results and Discussion”. Alternatively, they may be presented under two separate sections (“Results” section and “Discussion” Sections). Short sub-headings may be added in each section if required.
A small paragraph summarizing the contents of the article, presenting the final outcome of the research or proposing further study on the subject, may be given at the end of the article under the Conclusion section.
The authors need to declare the funding sources of their manuscripts clearly by providing the name of the funding agency or financial support along with allotted grant/award number in round brackets (if applied), for instance, "This work was financially supported by [Name of the funding agency] (Grant number XXX)".
Similarly, if a paper does not have any specific funding source, and is part of the employment of the authors, then the name of the employer will be required. Authors will have to clearly state that the funder was involved in writing, editing, approval, or decision to publish the article.
Greek Symbols and Special Characters
Greek symbols and special characters often undergo formatting changes and get corrupted or lost during preparation of manuscript for publication. To ensure that all special characters used are embedded in the text, these special characters should be inserted as a symbol but should not be a result of any format styling (Symbol font face) otherwise they will be lost during conversion to PDF/XML.
Authors are encouraged to consult reporting guidelines. These guidelines provide a set of recommendations comprising a list of items relevant to their specific research design. Chemical equations, chemical names, mathematical usage, unit of measurements, chemical and physical quantity & units must conform to SI and Chemical Abstracts or IUPAC.
All kinds of measurements should be reported only in International System of Units (SI).
In case there is a need to present lengthy, but essential methodological details, appendices must be used, which can be a part of the article. An appendix must not exceed three pages (Times New Roman, 10 point fonts, 900 max. words per page).The information should be provided in a condensed form, ruling out the need of full sentences. A single appendix should be titled APPENDIX, while more than one can be titled APPENDIX A, APPENDIX B, and so on.
Supportive/Supplementary Material (if any)
We do encourage to append supportive material, for example a PowerPoint file containing information about the study, a PowerPoint file containing additional screenshots, a Word, RTF, or PDF document showing the original instrument(s) used, a video, or the original data (SAS/SPSS files, Ms Excel files, Access Db files etc.) provided it is inevitable or endorsed by the journal's Editor.
Supportive/Supplementary material intended for publication must be numbered and referred to in the manuscript but should not be a part of the submitted paper. In-text citations as well as a section with the heading "Supportive/Supplementary Material" before the "References" section should be provided. All Supportive/Supplementary Material must be listed and a brief caption line for each file describing its contents should be included.
Any additional files will be linked to the final published article in the form supplied by the author, but will not be displayed within the paper. They will be made available in exactly the same form as originally provided only on our Web site. Please also make sure that each additional file is a single table, figure or movie (please do not upload linked worksheets or PDF files larger than one sheet). Supportive/ Supplementary material must be provided in a single zipped file not larger than 4 MB.
Authors must clearly indicate if these files are not for publication but meant for the reviewers'/editors' perusal only.
List of Abbreviations
If abbreviations are used in the text either they should be defined in the text where first used, or a list of abbreviations can be provided.
RESEARCH ETHICS AND POLICIES
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
All potential conflicts of interest (competing interests) that could have a direct or indirect influence on the work must be disclosed by the authors. Even if an author does not have a conflict, disclosing affiliations and interests allows for a more comprehensive and open approach, which leads to a more accurate and objective evaluation of the work. Conflicts of interest, whether genuine or imagined, are a perspective to which the readers are entitled.
The publication of a conflict statement in the article itself, as well as the submission of the conflict disclosure form, is required for all types of papers. It is not necessarily the case that a monetary relationship with examination support or funding for counseling work is inappropriate. Even if the authors do not have any conflict of interest, they still need to provide a confirmation statement in their manuscripts, i.e., “The author(s) confirm(s) that there is no conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”
The following are some examples of potential conflicts of interest that are directly or indirectly related to the research:
Financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):
Type of support/grant number
Institutional Conflicts of Interest
Funds received by the author
Funds received by the institution
Travel allowances for the research
Funds received for article preparation and reviewing
Funds for conducting review activities
Support provided for article writing assistance, for drugs, equipment, etc
Pending fund or grant
Financial conflicts of interest can be personal as well as institutional. Personal conflict of interest occurs when a contributor involved in the publication process either receives an amount of money or expects to receive some financial help (including any other financial benefits such as patents or stocks, gifts or services) that may impact the work related to a specific publication. More importantly, in academic research, such financial relationships can lead to institutional conflicts of interest (COIs) because the economic interests of the institution or institutional representatives may unsuitably affect the decision-making process.
An institutional conflict of interest arises in a situation when financial interests of an institution or any institutional official (e.g., investments held by the university in a company) have the potential to unduly influence the research conducted by its employees or students, or pose an unacceptable risk to human subjects. Such conflicts usually arise in a state of affairs where a research project directly offers assistance or a benefit to an external entity via evaluation, validation, trial or test of an invention, product, drug, service or technology, and the institution holds a financial interest with the external entity. Such financial interests incorporate, but are not limited to, receipt of licensing payments or royalties from the external entity, or ownership interest with the external entity. When human subjects are involved in any research project, and the institution supports such a financial interest, the conflict of interest is speculated to be unreasonable.
Non-financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):
In addition, interests other than monetary and any funding (non-financial interests) should be declared if they are relevant to readers. Personal relationships or conflicting interests directly or indirectly related to research, as well as professional interests or personal opinions that may impact your research, are examples of these.
Intellectual property, in basic terms, refers to any intangible property that is the result of creativity, such as patents, copyrights, etc. Similarly, this section seeks to know about copyright and patent (licensed patent, pending or issued) and any payment received for intellectual property, such as:
All conflict of interest disclosure forms are collected by the corresponding author. It is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors in author collaborations when legal agreements for representation allow it. The templates of the form can be found here.
Before the reference list, the corresponding author will include a summary statement in the text of the article that reflects what is reported in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form (s). Author(s) may declare(s) names of reviewers who they think might have a potential conflict of interest; therefore, Editorial Office could avoid inviting such reviewers for an unbiased opinion.
UNDISCLOSED CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Undisclosed conflict of interest cases before or after the publication of an article are dealt with as per the guidelines of COPE.
Undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted article (View COPE guidelines)
Undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article (View COPE guidelines)
For more information on COIs, see the guidance from the ICMJE.
Bentham Science tries to conduct a transparent peer-review process with the help of the reviewers who do not have any conflict of interest with the authors. In this connection, reviewers who belong to the same institute or countries as authors are not invited to review manuscripts. However, it is not possible for the Editorial Office to be aware of all competing interests; therefore, it is expected from authors to submit:
List of reviewers who they think have a conflict of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review process.
The Editorial Office expects reviewers:
Not to accept manuscript review requests if they have any potential conflict of interest and inform the Editorial Office accordingly.
To decline review requests if they have recently published or submitted an article with any of the authors listed in the manuscript.
To inform the Editorial Office if they have any personal relationship with the authors or work in the same institutes as of authors, which could affect the review transparency.
To abstain from reviewing and informing the Editorial Office/Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editors about any scientific misconduct or fraud, plagiarism, conflict of interest, or any other unethical behavior related to the manuscript, which they found while reviewing it.
During the submission of review comments, reviewers are asked to reconfirm that they do not have any conflict of interest related to the article. After confirming the below statement, they can submit their comments.
“I hereby confirm that I don’t have any conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”
If, however, there are still any remaining interests, then reviewers must mention those in the ‘Confidential’ section of the review form.
Reviewers are not encouraged to contact authors directly regarding any of their conflicts of interest. Peer reviewers should follow journals’ policies in situations they consider to represent a conflict to reviewing.
UNDISCLOSED CONFLICT OF INTEREST
If reviewers intentionally undisclosed any conflict of interest, then they will be blacklisted for any future peer reviewing activity of the journal.
The Editorial Office always ensures that an author, if added after peer review activity of a manuscript, is not part of the reviewers’ list who have conducted a peer review of the same manuscript.
Editors must not review submitted manuscripts if they have any personal, professional or financial involvement/conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript. Every participant involved in the peer review process, including editorial board members, reviewers, and editors, must declare any potential conflicts of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review activity.
Editors-in-Chief or Editors who are responsible for the initial and final decision should recuse themselves to review or take decisions on any manuscript that is written by authors affiliated to the same institute as of editor, or if they have been a family member, competitor, collaborator, or have published any manuscript in last 3 years with the authors associated with the manuscript. They can however nominate someone else on the Board who could provide a neutral opinion on the manuscript.
Manuscripts submission by an Editor/Editor-in-Chief
The initial and final decision on the manuscripts submitted by an Editor/Editor-in-Chief will be taken by any other member of the Board. The Editorial Office will identify members who do not have any potential conflict of interest with the Editor or Editor-in-Chief.
Any research assistants or other individuals who assisted with the research but are not listed as authors, such as those who carried out the literature review, produced, computerized, and analyzed the data, or helped with the language, writing, or proofreading of the article, or offered any comments or suggestions, should be acknowledged. Briefly, everyone who has contributed significantly to the improvement of the paper should be acknowledged. It is recommended to mention the "Declared None" if there is no acknowledgement for the study.
Guest or honorary authorship based solely on position (e.g. research supervisor, departmental head) is discouraged.
The specific requirements for authorship have been defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org). Examples of authors' contributions are: 'designed research/study', 'performed research/study', 'contributed important reagents', 'collected data', 'analyzed data', 'wrote paper' etc. This information must be included in the submitted manuscript as a separate paragraph under the heading 'Authors' Contirbution'. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining permission from all co-authors for the submission of any version of the manuscript and for any changes in the authorship.
HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS
Research Involving Humans
All clinical investigations should be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki principles. For all manuscripts reporting data from studies involving human participants, formal review and approval by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee are required.
Compliance with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org) is recommended, in accordance with the patient’s consent for research or participation in a study as per the applicable laws and regulations regarding the privacy and/or security of personal information, including, but not limited to, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA") and other U.S. federal and state laws relating to confidentiality and security of personally distinguishable evidence, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679 and member state implementing legislation, Canada's Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, India's Information Technology Act and related Privacy Rules, (together "Data Protection and Privacy Laws").
It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that:
Patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers are not mentioned anywhere in the manuscript (including figures).
Authors are responsible for obtaining the patient consent-to-disclose forms for all recognizable patients in photographs, videos, or other information that may be published in the Journal, in derivative works, or on the journal’s website and for providing the manuscript to the recognizable patient for review before submission.
The consent-to-disclose form should indicate specific use (publication in the medical literature in print and online, with the understanding that patients and the public will have access) of the patient's information and any images in figures or videos, and must contain the patient's signature or that of a legal guardian along with a statement that the patient or legal guardian has been offered the opportunity to review the identifying materials and the accompanying manuscript.
If the manuscript has an individuals’ data, such as personal details, audio-video material, etc., consent should be obtained from that individual. In case of children, consent should be obtained from the parent or the legal guardian.
A specific declaration of such approval and consent-to-disclose form must be made in the copyright letter and in a stand-alone paragraph at the end of the article especially in the case of human studies where inclusion of a statement regarding obtaining the written informed consent from each subject or subject's guardian is a must. The original should be retained by the guarantor or the corresponding author. Editors may request to provide the original forms by fax or email.
All such case reports require by a proper consent being obtained prior to publishing. Please refer COPE guidelines available at https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/journals%E2%80%99-best-practices-ensuring-consent-publishing-medical-case-reports.
Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
Anonymous images, that do not identify the individual directly or indirectly, such as through any identifying marks or text, do not require formal consent, for example, X-rays, ultrasound images, pathology slides or laparoscopic images.
In case consent is not obtained, concealing the identity through eye bars or blurring the face would not be acceptable.
Research Involving Animals
For research involving animals, the authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the standards set forth in the eighth edition of “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals_prepub.pdf published by the National Academy of Sciences, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.).
Research work on animals should be carried out in accordance with the NC3Rs ARRIVE Guidelines. For In Vivo Experiments, please visit https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines
Authors should clearly state the name of the approval committee, highlighting that legal and ethical approvals were obtained prior to initiation of the research work carried out on animals, and that the experiments were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations stated below.
US authors should cite compliance with the US National Research Council's "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"
The US Public Health Service's "Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" and "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"
UK authors should conform to UK legislation under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations (SI 2012/3039).
European authors outside the UK should conform to Directive 2010/63/EU.
The manuscript should clearly include a declaration of compliance with the relevant guidelines (e.g. the revised Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in the UK and Directive 2010/63/EU in Europe) and/or relevant permissions or licenses obtained by the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Research Involving Plants
All experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild), should comply with international guidelines. The manuscript should include a declaration of compliance of field studies with relevant guidelines and/or relevant permissions or licenses obtained by the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Any unusual risks associated with the use of any chemicals, procedures, or equipment used in the work must be explicitly stated by the author in the manuscript, preferably in both the materials and methods section and the declaration section. For more information, visit The World Medical Association (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/public-health/chemicals)
RESEARCH CONDUCTED IN SPECIAL OR CRITICAL SITUATIONS
Bentham Science expects all contributors to respect values of justice, benevolence, and autonomy when conducting research. We understand that certain situations such as medical emergencies or humanitarian crises may differ from non-emergency scenarios. Bentham Science recommends that research efforts should not hurt human subjects/respondents or the researchers, and should be conducted with sufficient scientific rigor as permissible in these situations, respectively. Care should be taken to address potential problems faced by persons who may be victims of disasters or involved in a medical emergency. These are vulnerable individuals and their privacy and dignity should be respected. Researchers should make note of this in their research and identify potential issues in their work that may arise because of such situations. Research directed in emergency circumstances should be to the greatest advantage of survivors involved in the research and with the goal of minimizing any future casualties. For guidance, the essential requirements of research in emergency situation are the preservation of human life, wellbeing and security, along with the rights to protection, privacy and confidentiality of subjects.
Unethical behavior and misconduct may be pointed out by anyone to the Editor and Publisher with sufficient evidences. The Editor, in consultation with the Publisher, will initiate investigation against this Unethical misconduct, complete the procedure till an unbiased decision is reached, and maintain confidentiality throughout the process of the investigation. The Author should be given the opportunity to reply to all minor or major accusations.
In case of serious breaches, the employer may be informed where appropriate, by the Editor/Publisher, after reviewing all available information and evidences or after seeking help from experts in that field.
Author(s) and Reviewers must be informed in case of misinterpretation or mishandling of International Acceptable Standards
A strict notice should be sent to the author and reviewer to avoid future unethical misconduct
An Editorial on the reported misconduct should be published or official notice of unethical behavior should be posted on the website
Official letter about this misconduct should be issued to the Head of Departments, Funding Agencies of the accused author and the reviewer, as well as Abstracting & Indexing Agencies.
Where required, retraction and withdrawal of publication may be undertaken from the Publisher’s journal in discussion with the Head of the Department of the author or reviewer, and other higher authorities should be informed
The Publisher may impose restrictions for some period on future publications from the accused author in the journals
Consent for Publication
If the manuscript has an individuals’ data, such as personal detail, audio-video material etc., consent should be obtained from that individual. In case of children, consent should be obtained from the parent or the legal guardian.
A specific declaration of such approval and consent-to-disclose form must be made in the copyright letter and in a stand-alone paragraph at the end of the article especially in the case of human studies where inclusion of a statement regarding obtaining the written informed consent from each subject or subject's guardian is a must. The original should be retained by the guarantor or corresponding author. Editors may request to provide the original forms by fax or email.
All such case reports should be followed by a proper consent prior to publishing.
RANDOMIZED DRUG CLINICAL TRIAL STUDIES
Randomized drug clinical trial studies are biomedical or health-related interventional and/or observational research studies conducted in phases in human beings who are randomly allocated to receive or not receive a preventive, therapeutic, or diagnostic intervention that follows a pre-defined protocol. The study is intended to determine the safety and efficacy of approaches to disease prevention, diagnosis and treatment.
Authors of randomized controlled trials are encouraged to submit trial protocols along with their manuscripts. All clinical trials must be registered (before recruitment of the first participant) at an appropriate online public trial registry that must be independent of for-profit interest (e.g.,www.clinicaltrials.gov). If you wish the editor(s) to consider an unregistered trial, please explain briefly why the trial has not been registered.
All randomized clinical trials should include a flow diagram and authors should provide a completed randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
Studies of diagnostic accuracy must be reported according to STARD guidelines; (www.stard-statement.org)
Observational studies (cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs) must be reported according to the STROBE statement, and should be submitted with their protocols; (www.strobe-statement.org).
Genetic association studies must be reported according to STREGA guidelines; (www.medicine.uottawa.ca)
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines; (www.prisma-statement.org)
To find the reporting guidelines see ( www.equator-network.org)
Important points to remember while submitting clinical trials:
Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a comment section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions. Data included in research reports must be original.
Trial registry name, registration identification number, and the URL for the registry should be included at the end of the abstract and also in the space provided on the online manuscript submission form. If your research article reports the results of a controlled health care intervention, list the trial registry, along with the unique identifying number (Please note that there should be no space between the letters and numbers of your trial registration number). Studies designed for other purposes, such as to study pharmacokinetics or major toxicity (e.g., phase 1 trials), are exempted.
All reports of randomized trials should include a section entitled “Randomization and Masking”, within the Methods section.
The manuscript must include a statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee that has approved the experiments, including any relevant details.
The SI system of units and the recommended international non-proprietary name (rINN) for drug names must be used. Kindly ensure that the dose, route, and frequency of administration of any drug you mention are correct.
Please ensure that the clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies follow the guidelines on good publication practice: (https://www.ismpp.org/gpp2)
The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS
The source of data and materials should be mentioned in the manuscript, in support of the findings. Sharing research data is integral to its transparency and reproducibility. Data sharing involves the citation and availability of data that support the findings of the research.
Bentham Science encourages authors to share the source of data and materials in the manuscript, in support of the findings.
Research Data Policy Types:
The four types of research data policies are mentioned below.
Case 1: Data sharing and data citation
Case 2: Data sharing and its evidence
Case 3: Statement for Data sharing and data availability
Case 4: Data sharing, evidence of data sharing and data for peer-review
Case 1: Data Sharing and Data Citation
Wherever appropriate and possible, the journal encourages authors to publish data to support their research findings in a public repository. Any datasets mentioned in the article that are available in external repositories should be cited.
How to Cite the Data?
Whether the data was developed by the author(s) or researcher(s), all publicly available data referenced in the preparation of an article should be cited in the text and reference list. The references relating to the data availability should be presented in the following format:
Example: Name of author(s), the title of data set, data repository, document version (e.g., most recent updated version), Digital Object Identifier (DOI), and Bentham Science reference style should be included in data citations.
Case 2: Data Sharing and Its Evidence
When authors submit a paper to a journal, the authors agree that the data provided in the publication, including the relevant raw data, will be freely available to any researcher who wants to use these for non-commercial reasons without jeopardising participant anonymity.
Case 3: Statement for Data Sharing and Data Availability
Data availability declarations are required under Bentham Science research data policy types.
The statement relating to the data availability should be presented in the following format under a separate section for ‘Availability of Data and Materials’ in the manuscript:
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary materials.
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [author initials], on special request.
The datasets generated or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to [mention the reason(s)].
Authors who do not wish to share their data should clearly state that the data will not be shared, and thus mention as ‘Not applicable’.
The statement relating to the data should be presented in the following format:
"The data supporting the findings of the article is available in the [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number]”.
Additional Data Availability Statements
Authors can add or change the statement(s) above, to fit their work the best. Depending on the nature of the research, several assertions may need to be merged.
Case 4: Data Sharing, Evidence of Data Sharing and Data for Peer-Review
All datasets on which the paper's conclusions are based must be made accessible to reviewers and readers, according to the journal's rules. Prior to peer review, authors must either deposit their datasets in publicly accessible repositories or provide them as supplementary materials with their submission. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
Data Access and Retention
Authors may provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data. if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
STANDARDS OF REPORTING
The Authors are encouraged to use industry-recognized reporting guidelines for biomedical and biological research, if applicable, to explain that all requirements for reporting have been adopted.
All authors must strictly follow the reporting guidelines below for preparing the study for publication.
CONSORT: All randomized clinical trials must include a flow diagram and authors should provide a completed randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol.For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
STROBE: Observational studies (cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs) must be reported according to the STROBE statement, and should be submitted with their protocols; (www.strobe-statement.org).
CARE: Case report must be reported according to CARE guidelines; (www.care-statement.org)
COREQ: Qualitative research must be reported according to COREQ guidelines; (academic.oup.com/intqhc/article/19/6/349/1791966)
CHEERS: Economic evaluations must be reported according to CHEERS guidelines; (www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f1049)
STREGA: Genetic association studies must be reported according to STREGA guidelines; (www.medicine.uottawa.ca)
PRISMA: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines; (www.prisma-statement.org)
MOOSE: Meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology must be reported according to MOOSE guidelines (http://www.ijo.in/documents/14MOOSE_SS.pdf)
EQUATOR: To find the reporting guidelines see (www.equator-network.org)
Post-publication discussions are well-timed and engaging scientific remarks and justifications on research articles published in the journal. These remarks must be based on the information concurrent with the original study and not on the scientific advancements being made subsequently.
Manuscript Preparation, Submission & Editorial Process:
- Post-publication discussion should commence with a short paragraph that outlines the summary of the article.
- Authors are advised to avoid using inciting tone in the comments and keep the message clear and concise.
- The main text should not exceed 1200 words with up to 15 references and may include one or two figures and/or tables.
- References should be submitted in the ACS or Vancouver style.
- The correspondents are recommended to contact the original authors first prior to submitting their comments to the journal as this may resolve the issues that may have arisen due to some misunderstanding.
- The correspondence that has been done with the authors should also be submitted as an attachment with the manuscript.
Any queries therein should be addressed to email@example.com
Figures/ Illustrations (if any)
All authors must strictly follow the guidelines below for preparing illustrations for publication in the journal. If the figures are found to be sub-standard, then the manuscripts will be rejected.
The authors are expected to submit good quality figure(s) in PDF, PPT, MS Word, TIFF or JPEG versions, which, if required, should be improved yourself or by professional graphic designers of your organization/ country. You may even consider approaching our contracted service providers Eureka Science for Graphics Enhancement Services.
The Graphics Designing team at Eureka Science can assist in improving the quality of your images at affordable rates. Eureka Science has offered special rates of US $150 for the improvement of up to five figures, with any additional figures being charged at US $25 each.
The quality of Graphic Enhancement Services offered by Eureka Science can be viewed at http://www.eureka-science.com/images/Binder1.pdf, along with valuable feedback on their services at http://www.eureka-science.com/testimonials.php. You may contact Eureka Science at firstname.lastname@example.org
Note: Availing Graphics Enhancement Services does not guarantee acceptance of the manuscript for publication. The final acceptance/decision on the manuscript is taken by the EiC.
Guideline for Figures/Illustrations
Illustrations must be provided according to the following guideline:
Illustrations should be embedded in the text file, and must be numbered consecutively in the order of their appearance. Each figure should include only a single illustration which should be cropped to minimize the amount of space occupied by the illustration.
If a figure is in separate parts, all parts of the figure must be provided in a single composite illustration file.
Photographs should be provided with a scale bar if appropriate, as well as high-resolution component files.
All the numbers, symbols and letters in figures should be consistent and clear throughout and large enough to remain readable when the size is reduced for publication.
It must be ensured to cite each figure in the text in sequence.
Line Art image type is normally an image based on lines and text. It does not contain tonal or shaded areas. The preferred file format should be TIFF or EPS, with the color mode being Monochrome 1-bit or RGB, in a resolution of 900-1200 dpi.
Halftone image type is a continuous tone photograph containing no text. It should have the preferred file format TIFF, with color mode being RGB or Grayscale, in a resolution of 300 dpi.
Combination image type is an image containing halftone, text or line art elements. It should have the preferred file format TIFF, with color mode being RGB or Grayscale, in a resolution of 500-900 dpi.
Illustrations may be submitted in the following file formats:
EPS (preferred format for diagrams)
PDF (also especially suitable for diagrams)
PNG (preferred format for photos or images)
Microsoft Word (version 5 and above; figures must be a single page)
PowerPoint (figures must be a single page)
JPEG (conversion should be done using the original file)
Bentham Science Publishers does not process figures submitted in GIF format.
For TIFF or EPS figures with considerably large file size restricting the file size in online submissions is advisable. Authors may therefore convert to JPEG format before submission as this results in significantly reduced file size and upload time, while retaining acceptable quality. JPEG is a ‘lossy’ format. However, in order In order to maintain acceptable image quality, it is recommended that JPEG files are saved at High or Maximum quality.
Zipit or Stuffit tools should not be used to compress files prior to submission as the resulting compression through these tools is always negligible.
Please refrain from supplying:
Graphics embedded in word processor (spreadsheet, presentation) document.
Optimized files optimized for screen use (like GIF, BMP, PICT, WPG) because of the low resolution.
Files with too low a resolution.
Graphics that are disproportionately large for the content.
Technical requirements for graphic/ figure submissions.
|Width = 8.5 inches (In-between the required size)|
|Height = 11 inches (In-between the required size)|
|Pixels/Inches = 300 (minimum dpi)|
|All figures should be in vector scale (except half tone, photograph.)|
Image Conversion Tools
There are many software packages, many of them freeware or shareware, capable of converting to and from different graphics formats, including PNG.
General tools for image conversion include Graphic Converter on the Macintosh, Paint Shop Pro, for Windows, and ImageMagick, available on Macintosh, Windows and UNIX platforms.
Bitmap images (e.g. screenshots) should not be converted to EPS as they result in a much larger file size than the equivalent JPEG, TIFF, PNG or BMP, and poor quality. EPS should only be used for images produced by vector-drawing applications such as Adobe Illustrator or CorelDraw. Most vector-drawing applications can be saved in, or exported as, EPS format. If the images were originally prepared in an Office application, such as Word or PowerPoint, original Office files should be directly uploaded to the site, instead of being converted to JPEG or another format of low quality.
Chemical Structures (if any)
Chemical structures must be prepared in ChemDraw/CDX and provided as separate file.
Structure Drawing Preferences
[As according to the ACS style sheet]
|Bond spacing||18% of width|
|Fixed length||14.4 pt (0.500cm, 0.2in)|
|Bold width||2.0 pt (0.071cm, 0.0278in)|
|Line width||0.6 pt (0.021cm, 0.0084in)|
|Margin width||1.6 pt (0.096cm)|
|Hash spacing||2.5 pt (0.088cm, 0.0347in)|
|Font||Times New Roman|
Tables (if any)
Data Tables should be submitted in Microsoft Word table format.
Each table should include a title/caption being explanatory in itself with respect to the details discussed in the table. Detailed legends may then follow.
Table number in bold font i.e. Table 1, should follow a title. The title should be in small case with the first letter in caps. A full stop should be placed at the end of the title.
Tables should be embedded in the text exactly according to their appropriate placement in the submitted manuscript.
Columns and rows of data should be made visibly distinct by ensuring that the borders of each cell are displayed as black lines.
Tables should be numbered in Arabic numerals sequentially in order of their citation in the body of the text.
If a reference is cited in both the table and text, please insert a lettered footnote in the table to refer to the numbered reference in the text.
Tabular data provided as additional files can be submitted as an Ms Excel spreadsheet.
It is adequate to present data in Tables to avoid unnecessary repetition and reduce the length of the text.
The citation of each table in the text must be ensured.
Symbols and nonstandard abbreviations should be explained in the end of the text.
All references should be numbered sequentially [in square brackets] in the table and listed in the same numerical order in the reference section.
LANGUAGE AND EDITING
Manuscripts containing language inconsistencies will not be published. Authors should seek professional assistance for correction of grammatical, scientific and typographical errors before submission of the revised version of the article for publication. Professional editing services may also be sought by the team available at Bentham Science.
Authors will receive page proofs of their accepted paper before publications. To avoid delays in publication, proofs should be checked immediately for typographical errors and returned within 48 hours. Major changes are not acceptable at the proof stage.
The corresponding author will be solely responsible for ensuring that the revised version of the manuscript incorporating all the submitted corrections receives the approval of all the co-authors of the manuscript.
OPEN ACCESS PLUS (GOLD OPEN ACCESS)
Bentham Science also offers authors the choice of “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” publication of articles. This paid service allows for articles to be disseminated to a much wider audience, on the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). Authors are asked to indicate whether or not they wish to pay to have their article made more widely available on this “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” basis. Where an author does not opt-in to this paid service, then the author’s article will be published only on Bentham Science’s standard subscription-based access, at no additional cost to the author.
For more information please contact us at e-mail: email@example.com
Bentham Science offers a 50% discount off the Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) Fee for manuscripts of all corresponding authors who reside in countries which are categorized as low-income economies by the World Bank. To see if you qualify to the discount, please refer to the complete list of these countries click here.
Printed reprints and e-prints may be ordered from the Publisher prior to publication of the article. First named authors may also order a personal print and online subscription of the journal at 50% off the normal subscription rate by contacting the subscription department at e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Extend the scope and visibility of your research by creating an animated abstract. Bentham Science has collaborated with Focus Medica, one of the world’s largest publishers of expert animated atlases and videos in medicine and science.
An animated abstract will help summarise the essential discoveries/ key findings of your published research or review article. Each professionally produced full-coloured animated abstract in video format (length 3 – 5 minutes) is accompanied by an English spoken or foreign language commentary. The animated abstract will be published online along with the published article.
The payment for an animated abstract will be US$ 1260 for English language, and US$ 1770 for Foreign language articles. Initially, an advance amount of US$ 800 will be payable to the Publisher to start work on the Animated Abstract, while the balance of US$ 460 (English language) or US$ 970 (Foreign language) will be payable on completion of the Animated Abstract.
Authors who opt for the “Animated Abstract” option and also wish to have their article made available on an “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” basis will be entitled to a 50% discount only on the Animated Abstract fee and, in addition, pay the normal Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) fee.
Authors will be asked whether they wish to opt-in for this paid animated abstract service, and if not, the article will be published as normal. Animated abstracts are available as open access (free viewing) for maximum visibility and awareness to readers at anytime, anywhere. The animated abstracts are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
For a sample of an animated abstract please access here https://www.benthamscience.com/pages/animated-abstract-video
REVIEWING AND PROMPTNESS OF PUBLICATION
All papers submitted for publication are immediately subjected to preliminary editorial scrutiny by the Editor-in-Chief regarding their suitability. The Editor-in-Chief determines if the manuscript
(a) falls within the scope of the journal and
(b) meets the editorial criteria of Bentham Science Publishers in terms of originality and quality.
Manuscripts that appear to be suitable are then subjected to single-blind peer-review by, usually three, neutral eminent experts. The services of eminent international experts are sought through invitations to conduct the peer-review of a submitted manuscript, keeping in view the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of the reviewers. The identity of the reviewers is not disclosed to the authors. The anonymity of reviewers ensures objective and unbiased assessment of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Before sending the manuscripts to reviewers, Bentham Science seeks consent from potential reviewers about their availability and willingness to review. Correspondence between the editorial office of the journal and the reviewers is kept confidential. The reviewers are expected to provide their reports in a timely fashion since a prompt review leads to timely publication of a manuscript which is beneficial not only to the authors but to the scientific community as well.
The editorial process and peer-review workflow for each journal are taken care of by a team of Senior Editors, Editorial Board Members (EBMs) and dedicated Journal managers who have the required expertise in their specific fields.
Bentham Science Publishers carries out independent review of all articles. The reviewers are selected according to their expertise, from our, regularly updated, referee database.
On the basis of reviewer comments, the Editors may recommend acceptance, revision or rejection of a manuscript.
After review of the manuscript by at least three independent experts, in addition to the views of the Editor, the decision is relayed to the authors, which may be categorized as:
Requires minor changes
Requires major changes
Rejected but may be resubmitted
Rejected with no resubmission
Bentham Science requests not to have the manuscripts peer-reviewed by those experts who may have competing interest with the author(s) of a submitted manuscript. It is not possible for Editors to be aware of all competing interests; it is therefore expected that the reviewers would inform the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor if they notice any potential competing interest during the course of review of a manuscript. Moreover, the reviewers are expected to inform the Editors or editorial office of the journal if they have a conflict of interest in carrying out the review of a manuscript submitted by any author/contributor of the manuscript.
The authors are usually requested to resubmit the revised paper within 15 days and it will then be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation. The publishers normally allow one round of revision and, in exceptional cases, a second round of revision may be allowed. If further revision is needed, then the manuscript is rejected and the author is requested to resubmit the manuscript for fresh processing.
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is that of the Editor-in-Chief, depending on the quality of the revision and his assessment of the quality of the manuscript. In rare cases, manuscripts recommended for publication by the referees may be rejected in the final assessment by the Editor-in-Chief.
The time frame for revision of any article may vary from one to four weeks, depending on the nature of the revision required (minor or major). However, authors who need extra time for revision should consult the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor with valid reasons and the submission date of the revised manuscript may be extended if the request is genuine.
After the successful completion of the review and acceptance of the article, the articles are typeset and proofs are dispatched to authors for any corrections prior to final publication.
GAIN MORE PUBLICATION REACH AND IMPACT VIA KUDOS
Bentham Science is a publishing partner of Kudos. All authors who publish in this journal will receive an invitation to join the Kudos platform, an entirely free service for authors. Kudos enables authors to help broaden their audience and readers, increase their professional profile and reputation, and establish an impact for their publications. The website link is www.growkudos.com.
Kudos provides a free platform to researchers to have their publications accessible, read and cited across multiple networks and channels available to researchers for the dissemination of their work. It takes on average 15 minutes and leads to 23% higher growth in full-text downloads.
Authors are encouraged to explain their work in clear English and to attract researchers of the relevant communities, share a trackable link that you can email to your existing network of contacts, or share on social media and academic websites, and track how well the articles are performing through the summary of views, downloads, citations, and altmetrics on the Kudos dashboard.
Authors may also use the new shareable PDF (S-PDF) service. The S-PDF provides researchers with the means to write and share a high-level overview for each of their publications. Kudos thereby provides researchers, and their publishers and institutions, with a rich understanding of which channels and activities are most effective for broadening the reach and impact of published science.
E-PUB AHEAD OF SCHEDULE
Bentham Science Publishers is pleased to offer electronic publication of accepted papers prior to scheduled publication. These peer-reviewed papers can be cited using the date of access and the unique DOI number. Any final changes in manuscripts will be made at the time of print publication and will be reflected in the final electronic version of the issue. Articles ahead of schedule may be ordered by pay-per-view at the relevant links by each article stated via the E-Pub Ahead of Schedule.
Articles appearing in E-Pub Ahead-of-Schedule sections have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in this journal and posted online before scheduled publication. Articles appearing here may contain statements, opinions, and information that have errors in facts, figures, or interpretation. Accordingly, Bentham Science Publishers, the editors , authors and their respective employees are not responsible or liable for the use of any such inaccurate or misleading data, opinion or information contained of articles in the E-Pub Ahead-of-Schedule.
APPEALS AND COMPLAINTS
Generally, the editorial decisions are not reverted. However, authors who think that their manuscript was rejected due to a misunderstanding or mistake may seek an explanation for the decision. Appeals must give sound reasoning and compelling evidence against the criticism raised in the rejection letter. A difference of opinion as to the interest, novelty, or suitability of the manuscript for the journal will not be considered as an appeal. The EIC and other relevant editors will consider the appeal and the decision thereafter taken by the journal will be deemed final. Acceptance of the manuscript is not guaranteed even if the journal agrees to reconsider the manuscript, and the reconsideration process may involve previous or new reviewers or editors and substantive revision.
Authors who wish to make a complaint should refer them to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal concerned. Complaints to the Publisher may be emailed to email@example.com