Complaints and Appeals Policy

1. Overview
The International Journal of Pharmacy and Life Sciences (IJPLS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and fairness in the scientific publishing process. We value transparency and fairness, and as such, we have established a clear and structured process for handling complaints and appeals from authors, reviewers, and other stakeholders.
This policy outlines the procedures for submitting complaints, appeals, and the resolution of disputes related to manuscript submissions, peer review, editorial decisions, and other matters concerning the journal’s publication process.

2. Types of Complaints and Appeals

  • Complaints:
    • Author Complaints: Authors may file complaints if they feel that the editorial or peer review process was unfair or that their work was mishandled.
    • Reviewer Complaints: Reviewers may file complaints regarding the quality of submissions they are asked to review or if they feel the review process was biased or unethical.
    • Editorial Complaints: Editors and other stakeholders may file complaints related to unethical behavior, potential conflicts of interest, or decisions made by the editorial board.
  • Appeals:
    • Appeal of Editorial Decision: Authors may appeal the editorial decision to reject a manuscript (whether a desk rejection or post-peer-review rejection). This may be done if the author believes that the decision was made on an incorrect basis or if there are new important facts or data to consider.
    • Appeal of Reviewer Comments: Authors may appeal the reviewer comments if they feel that the review was unjust, biased, or if the comments do not adequately address the scientific or methodological issues of the manuscript.
    • Appeal of Manuscript Withdrawal or Retraction: Authors may appeal a decision to withdraw or retract their manuscript if they believe the action was unjustified.

3. How to File a Complaint or Appeal

  • Step 1: Initial Contact
    • Complaints and appeals must be submitted in writing via email to the editorial office at [editor@ijpls.com].
    • Please include the following details in your email:
      • Full name and contact details
      • Manuscript title, reference number (if applicable), and any relevant submission information
      • A clear description of the issue (complaint or appeal) and the nature of the grievance
      • Any supporting documents or evidence related to the complaint or appeal (e.g., email correspondence, reviewer reports, etc.)
  • Step 2: Acknowledgment of Receipt
    • Upon receiving a complaint or appeal, the editorial team will acknowledge receipt within 5-7 business days. The acknowledgment will confirm that the complaint or appeal has been registered and is being reviewed.
  • Step 3: Review and Investigation
    • The editorial board will review the complaint or appeal thoroughly. This process may involve:
      • Consulting the reviewers, authors, or editors involved in the case.
      • Reviewing the relevant communication and documentation.
      • Considering whether any breaches of the journal's policies or ethical standards have occurred.
  • Step 4: Resolution
    • The editorial board will assess the complaint or appeal and provide a response. This process may take up to 30 days from the date of acknowledgment.
    • If the complaint is upheld, appropriate action will be taken. This may include a re-review of the manuscript, reconsideration of the editorial decision, or other remedial actions.
    • If the appeal is upheld, the manuscript will be re-evaluated based on the new evidence or reasoning provided by the author.
  • Step 5: Final Decision
    • A formal decision will be communicated to the complainant or appellant. This decision is final and will not be subject to further appeals unless new, significant evidence is provided.

4. Grounds for Appeals
Authors or reviewers may appeal an editorial decision based on the following grounds:

  • New Information: If there is new information or data that was unavailable at the time of the initial decision or review.
  • Editorial Oversight: If the complainant believes that an editorial decision (rejection, acceptance, or revision) was made without considering relevant data or in violation of the journal’s submission guidelines.
  • Bias or Unfair Review: If the complainant believes that the peer review process was unfair, biased, or lacking in professionalism.
  • Conflict of Interest: If there is a perceived or actual conflict of interest that was not disclosed or addressed during the review process.
  • Ethical Concerns: If the complainant believes that ethical standards were not followed (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation, ethical violations in the review process).

5. Review Process of Appeals
Appeals will be handled in an unbiased and transparent manner. The following steps outline the process:

  • Step 1: Initial Review of the Appeal
    A senior editor or associate editor will review the grounds for the appeal and determine whether it is valid. This process may involve discussions with the editor(s) and reviewers involved in the original decision.
  • Step 2: Review by an Independent Party
    If necessary, the journal may request an independent evaluation of the manuscript or the review process. This could involve re-engaging a reviewer or seeking advice from an external expert to assess the validity of the complaint or appeal.
  • Step 3: Decision and Communication
    The editorial board will make a final decision on the appeal. This decision will be communicated to the author(s) and other relevant parties, along with the rationale for the decision.

6. Complaints Regarding Unethical Behavior
IJPLS takes any allegations of unethical behavior seriously, including:

  • Plagiarism: Authors or reviewers suspected of plagiarism will be investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken, including retraction or removal of the manuscript.
  • Data Fabrication or Manipulation: Any allegation of data fabrication or falsification will be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the COPE guidelines.
  • Improper Conduct in Peer Review: If any reviewer is found to have conducted the review process improperly (e.g., by being biased, sharing confidential information, or failing to follow the journal's guidelines), appropriate actions will be taken.

7. Confidentiality
All complaints and appeals will be treated with the utmost confidentiality. Information will be shared only with those directly involved in the investigation and resolution of the complaint or appeal.

8. Outcomes of Complaints and Appeals

  • Reconsideration: If a complaint or appeal is upheld, the editorial board will reconsider the manuscript or decision. This could lead to a re-review, a change in editorial decision, or other appropriate actions.
  • Publication of Corrections or Retractions: If necessary, the journal will publish a correction or retraction notice in accordance with its policies.
  • No Further Action: If the appeal or complaint is not upheld, the original decision stands, and no further action will be taken.

9. Contact Information
For questions or to submit a complaint or appeal, please contact the editorial office:
Email: [editor@ijpls.com]