TRANSFERSOMES PDF

Peer Review and Publication Policy 2. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement Peer Review and Publication Policy Peer-review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Reviewers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity, and significance to help editors to determine whether the manuscript should be published in the journal. Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal.

Author:Dijar Jujas
Country:Cambodia
Language:English (Spanish)
Genre:Art
Published (Last):18 November 2005
Pages:211
PDF File Size:2.8 Mb
ePub File Size:16.49 Mb
ISBN:499-8-89516-874-1
Downloads:23674
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader:Faelkis



Peer Review and Publication Policy 2. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement Peer Review and Publication Policy Peer-review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Reviewers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity, and significance to help editors to determine whether the manuscript should be published in the journal. Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts.

It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal.

Those that meet the editorial policies and a minimum quality level are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Type of Peer Review The journal employs the double-blind peer review process, where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review process. How the Reviewers is selected Whenever possible, Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated.

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but Reviewers may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the Reviewers. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial Reviewers who may then request another revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the Reviewers and may include verbatim comments by the Reviewers.

The journal is dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and the Editorial board do not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles to journal affirm that manuscript contents are original. Duties of Editors Publication decisions: The editors at the Journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Fair play: An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Duties of Reviewers Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The reviewer should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Data Access and Retention: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases , if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Retraction Policy When plagiarism has been found to have occurred, the Editorial Board will take the actions as determined by the type of plagiarism. Unless determined otherwise during the investigation, all authors are deemed to be individually and collectively responsible for the content of a plagiarizing paper. Editorial Board places the investigation of each claim of plagiarism at the highest priority for resolution and action.

Action s in case of plagiarism in a published article and proven misconduct: A letter is sent to authors involved in. They are informed about the perpetrated act. Blacklisting of all Authors involved in the article, banning them to publish any content with Journal. PDF of the article will no longer be available online.

The initial PDF document will be replaced by a retraction note. We pursue the retraction of this article from other online indexing services. Authors retain copyright of their work. Once the material has been accepted for publication, authors are asked to sign a copyright form verifying that they have the right to publish the material and that they grant permission to the journal to publish their work online. In addition: Authors retain the right to publish extended versions of their material elsewhere, provided the original publication is acknowledged.

Authors retain the right to publish their work in online repositories, internal technical reports, etc. Journal does not pay honoraria to authors. Journal has the right to edit the material to meet the publication standards.

HAMP RMA FORM PDF

Transfersome

Chirag Patel has published various Books, Research and Review articles. Recently, various strategies have been used to augment the transdermal delivery of bioactives. Mainly, they include electrophoresis, iontophoresis, chemical permeation enhancers, microneedles, sonophoresis, and vesicular system like liposomes, niosomes, elastic liposomes such as ethosomes and transfersomes. Among these strategies transferosomes appear promising. A novel vesicular drug carrier system called transfersomes, which is composed of phospholipid, surfactant, and water for enhanced transdermal delivery. Transfersomes are a form of elastic or deformable vesicle, which were first introduced in the early s.

A GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING PLCS BY PHIL MELORE PDF

TRANSFERSOMES: A NOVEL TECHNIQUE FOR TRANSDERMAL DRUG DELIVERY

.

CARDIOPATHIE CONGNITALE PDF

Transfersomes – A Review

.

Related Articles