In ZJPS we believe that a robust editorial process is valuable both to authors and the scientific community. Therefore, we apply a double-blind peer-review process with the help of a variety of experts covering different fields of pharmaceutical sciences, and our reviewers’ database is updated regularly. The steps of our peer-review process are shown in the figure as follows:

1. Submitted manuscripts will be assigned to one of the editorial team who is an expert in the field. The editor will assess the manuscript to determine whether it is within the scope of the journal, the quality of the data presented, and the standard of presentation before sending it for peer review.
2. Manuscripts will be sent to two reviewers who will be asked to assess whether the manuscript technically and scientifically meets our standards of originality, novelty, and linguistics.
3. The final editorial decision is made based on the recommendations of the peer reviewers, provided that these recommendations are devoid of any strong dissenting opinions. Where there are dissenting or opposing views, the manuscript is assessed by a third reviewer. Once all reviews have been received and considered by the editors, a final decision is made, and a letter is drafted to the corresponding author. Possible final decisions include:

• Accept after a minor revision.
• Resubmit the manuscript for review after major revision.

Reject. The author may be notified of the reasons that led to manuscript rejection to help the 

• author improve the quality of upcoming research.

Timing:

To achieve an efficient revision process as quickly as possible, the editors ask reviewers to respond promptly within the number of days agreed and notify them before the deadline is due. The journal’s first decision for the first-round revision may be expected at the earliest 3-4 weeks after submission, and the final decision of acceptance or rejection is expected within 6-8 weeks.