An online submission and tracking service
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
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
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
Authors who publish in Bentham Science print & online journals will transfer copyright to their work to Bentham Science Publishers. Submission of a manuscript to the respective journals implies that all authors have read and agreed to the content of the Copyright Letter or the Terms and Conditions. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered. By submitting a manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright of their article is transferred to the publishers if and when the article is accepted for publication. Once submitted to the journal, the author will not withdraw their manuscript at any stage prior to publication.
It is mandatory that a signed copyright letter also be submitted along with the manuscript by the author to whom correspondence is to be addressed. The article should not contain any such material or information that may be unlawful, defamatory, fabricated, plagiarized, or which would, if published, in any way whatsoever, violate the terms and conditions as laid down in the copyright agreement. Copyright letter can be downloaded from the journal's Web site. Download the Copyright letter.
Permission to Reuse Bentham Content
Bentham Science has collaborated with the Copyright Clearance Center to meet our customer’s licensing, besides rights & permission needs.
The Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink® service makes it faster and easier to secure permission from Bentham Science’s journal titles. Visit Journals by Title and locate the desired content. Then go to the article’s abstract and click on “Rights and Permissions” to open the RightsLink’s page. If authors can't find the content they are looking for or can't get the rights they need, please contact us at email@example.com
Authors are responsible for managing the inclusion of third-party content as an author/editor of a work. We refer to 'third party content' as any work that authors haven't developed themselves and have copied or adapted from other sources. Text, figures, photographs, tables, screenshots, and other items may be included.
Unless the figure is in the public domain (copyright-free) or permitted for use under Creative Commons or other open licences, the author must get permission from the copyright holder(s).
Published/reproduced material should not be included unless written permission has been obtained from the copyright holder, which should be forwarded to the Editorial Office in case of acceptance of the article for publication.
Articles are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted distribution and reproduction in any medium, ensuring that the work is properly cited. For more details, please visit Open Access Policy
By signing the Copyright Letter, the authors retain the rights of self-archiving (subject to certain restrictions).
Following are the important features of the self-archiving policy of Bentham Science journals:
Authors can deposit the first draft of a submitted article on their personal websites or their institution's repositories for personal use, internal institutional use, or for permitted scholarly posting only.
Authors may deposit the ACCEPTED VERSION of the peer-reviewed article on their personal websites, their institution's repository or the non-commercial repositories, PMC and arXiv, after 12 MONTHS of publication on the journal website. For personal use, internal institutional use, or for permitted scholarly posting only.
In case of (b) above, an acknowledgement must be given to the original source of publication and a link must be inserted to the published article on the journal's/publisher's website. The link to the original source of publication should be provided by inserting the DOI number of the article in the following sentence: "The published manuscript is available at EurekaSelect via https://www.eurekaselect.com/openurl/content.php?genre=article&doi=
If the research is funded by NIH, Wellcome Trust or any other Open Access Mandate, authors are allowed the archiving of published versions of manuscripts in the nominated institutional repositories, after the mandatory embargo period. Authors should first contact the Editorial Office of the journal for information about depositing a copy of the manuscript to a repository. Consistent with the copyright agreement, Bentham Science does not allow archiving of FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION of manuscripts unless under an Open Access mandate as above. Archiving, under any of the above mentioned Open Access mandates, is done under the terms of the Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 - Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.
There is no embargo on the archiving of articles published under the OPEN ACCESS PLUS category. Authors are allowed deposition of such articles on institutional, non-commercial repositories and personal websites immediately after publication on the journal website. This is done under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License CC-BY 4.0.
In case of any form of archiving, an acknowledgement must be given to the original source of publication and a link must be inserted to the published article on the journal's/publisher's website. The link to the original source of publication should be provided by inserting the DOI number of the article in the following sentence: "The published manuscript is available at EurekaSelect via https://www.eurekaselect.com/openurl/content.php?genre=article&doi=
To ensure permanent access to our publications, Bentham Science has an agreement with Portico to have a long-term preservation of the content published in its journals.
The Journal publishes peer-reviewed full-length/mini-review articles, systematic reviews, original research articles, commentaries, rapid technical notes, case reports, current frontiers and perspective written in English. Single topic/thematic issues may also be considered for publication.
These special issues are peer-reviewed and may contain invited or uninvited review/mini-review articles or a mixture of research articles, reviews/ mini-reviews and drugs clinical trials. 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 full-length thematic issue) from leading scientists. Authors interested in editing a single topic issue in an emerging topic of outstanding developments in pharmaceutical nanotechnology may submit their proposal to the Editor-in-Chief at firstname.lastname@example.org for consideration.
For proposals to publish conference proceedings in this journal, please contact us at email: email@example.com
The length of a published comprehensive review article is from 6000-10000 words with 100 or
more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables,
Mini-reviews should be 3000- 6000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures,
photographs, schemes, tables
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
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,
Ground breaking methods in nanosynthesis or nanocharacterisation are published. The total number of words for a published rapid technical note article is 2000 words or less.
Case reports should describe new observations of findings or novel/unique outcomes relevant to
the field. The total number of words for a published case report is 1500 to 2500 words with 40
or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables
The articles should be contributed by eminent experts on cutting-edge recent developments. They should be written in the format of mini-reviews (about 4 to 5 pages, approximately 800 to 850 words per composed page excluding tables, structures, graphics, figures and captions) with about 70 references to recent literature. All pages should be numbered sequentially.
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,
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.
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.
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 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.
Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology requests all authors to provide a lay summary of their paper. The aim of the lay summary is to encourage non-experts to access new science and engineering communicated in our papers. The lay summary should address the following areas in 100 words or less.
What was known previously?
What new knowledge is being communicated?
What is the significance of the findings?
The lay summary will be published below the abstract on the Table of Contents page.
Young people with Type 1 diabetes can be at a higher risk of diabetes-related complications, like kidney damage and heart disease. We are testing whether two drugs – ACE inhibitor and statin – can prevent kidney damage in 500 young people at risk of developing this complication. To see if the drugs work, we’ll be looking at how much albumin (a protein that indicates kidney damage) is in their urine. If the levels of albumin drop, it suggests that the drug could prevent diabetes-related complications in young people.
Previously, many scientific papers were only read by a handful of experts and their contents were poorly exploited as a result. Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology will now publish lay summaries of all its scientific papers alongside the paper’s technical abstract. This will allow non-experts working in allied fields to access the new science and engineering reported by scientists and engineers publishing their work in Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology and encourage a cross-fertilisation of ideas.
A graphic must be included 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
Graphical Abstracts should be submitted as a separate file (must clearly mention graphical
abstract within the file) online
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.
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, Acknowledgement and Reference sections. For Review, the manuscript 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 Acknowledgement and Reference sections. The review article should mention any previous important 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.
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
For case reports, the authors should follow the CARE guidelines. The CARE checklist should be submitted as a separate file.
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,
The Introduction section should include the background and aims of the research in a comprehensive manner.
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.
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 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 (
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, use appendices, 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.
We do encourage to append supportive material, for example a PowerPoint file containing a
talk 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, Excel files, Access Db files
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. Here, list all Supportive/Supplementary Material and include a brief caption line for each file describing its contents.
Any additional files will be linked into 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.
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.
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:
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.
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 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.
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.
The Editorial office recommends editors to follow COPE and WAME guidelines to process such manuscripts which involves their personal relationship.
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 (ICMJE
| Recommendations | Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors) Examples of authors'
contributions are: 'designed research/study', 'performed research/study', 'contributed important
reagents', 'collected data', 'analyzed data', 'wrote paper'
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,
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.
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
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.
Research on animals should adhere to ethical guidelines of The Basel Declaration and the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) ethical guidelines.
The manuscript should clearly include a declaration of compliance with the relevant
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.
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
If the manuscript has an individuals’ data, such as personal detail, audio-video material
A specific declaration of such approval must be made in the copyright letter and in a stand-alone paragraph at the end of the Methods section 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.
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)
Post-publication discussions are well-timed and engaging scientific remarks and justifications on research articles published in "Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology". 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 firstname.lastname@example.org
References should be submitted preferably in the ACS or Vancouver style. All references must be complete and accurate. The reference numbers must be finalized and the bibliography must be fully formatted before submission.
The references should be relevant to the study and should refer to the original research sources. Self-citation and self-interest should be avoided by the authors, editors and peer-reviewers.
See below few examples of references listed in the ACS and Vancouver Style:
In ACS style, all references should be numbered sequentially [in square brackets] in the text and listed in the same numerical order in the reference section. Superscript in the in-text citations and reference section should be avoided.
Different reference formats have different rules for citation. See below for some common format examples.
The minimum required information for a journal article reference is author, abbreviated journal
title, year, publication, volume number, and initial page of cited article, though complete
pagination is possible. Journal abbreviation and volume are
Bard, M.; Woods, R.A.; Bartón, D.H.; Corrie, J.E.; Widdowson, D.A. Sterol mutants of
Zhang, W.; Brombosz, S.M.; Mendoza, J.L.; Moore, J.S. A high-yield, one-step synthesis of
o-phenylene ethynylene cyclic trimer
Wheeler, D.M.S.; Wheeler, M.M. D. Stereoselective Syntheses of Doxorubicin and Related
Jakeman, D.L.; Withers, S.G.E. In:
National Library of Medicine. Specialized Information Services: Toxicology and
Environmental Health. sis.nlm.nih.gov/Tox/ToxMain.html
(Accessed May 23,
Hoch, J.A.; Huang, S. Screening methods for the identification of novel antibiotics. U.S. Patent 6,043,045, March 28, 2000.
Citations for articles/material published exclusively online or in open access (free-to-view), must contain the accurate Web addresses (URLs) at the end of the reference(s), except those posted on an author’s Web site (unless editorially essential), e.g. ‘Reference: Available from: URL’.
Some important points to remember
All authors must be cited and there should be no use of the phrase
Date of access should be provided for online citations.
Punctuation should be properly applied as mentioned in the examples given above.
Abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications (which can only be included if prior permission has been obtained) should not be given in the references section. The details may however appear in the footnotes.
The authors are encouraged to use a recent version of EndNote (version 5 and above) or Reference Manager (version 10) when formatting their reference list, as this allows references to be automatically extracted.
In Vancouver style, all references should be numbered sequentially [in square brackets] in the text and listed in the same numerical order in the reference section. Punctuation should be properly applied as mentioned in the examples given above.
Different reference formats have different rules for citation. See below for some common format examples.
The required information for a journal article is author, abbreviated journal title, year,
publication, volume number, and initial page of cited article, though complete pagination is
possible. It is necessary to list all authors if the total number of author is six or less and
for more than six authors use three authors and then et al (the term "
Al-Habian A, Harikumar PE, Stocker CJ, Langlands K, Selway JL. Histochemical and immunohistochemical evaluation of mouse skin histology: comparison of fixation with neutral buffered formalin and alcoholic formalin. J Histotechnol 2014; 37(4): 115-24.
Guilbert TW, Morgan WJ, Zeiger RS, Mauger DT, Boehmer SJ, Szefler SJ, et al. Long-term inhaled corticosteroids in preschool children at high risk for asthma. N Engl J Med. 2006 May 11;354(19):1985-1997.
Blaxter PS, Farnsworth TP. Social health and class inequalities. In: Carter C, Peel JR, Eds. Equalities and inequalities in health. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press 1976; pp. 165-78.
Phillips SJ, Whisnant JP. Hypertension and stroke. In: Laragh JH, Brenner BM, Eds. Hypertension: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management. 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press 1995; pp. 465-78.
Larsen CE, Trip R, Johnson CR. Methods for procedures related to the electrophysiology of the heart. US Patent 5529067, 1995.
Kimura J, Shibasaki H, Eds. Recent advances in clinical neurophysiology. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of EMG and Clinical Neurophysiology; 1995 Oct 15-19; Kyoto, Japan. Amsterdam: Elsevier 1996.
Borkowski MM. Infant sleep and feeding: a telephone survey of Hispanic Americans. PhD dissertation. Mount Pleasant (MI): Central Micihigan University 2002.
Aylin P, Bottle A, Jarman B, Elliott, P. Paediatric cardiac surgical mortality in England after Bristol: descriptive analysis of hospital episode statistics 1991-2002. BMJ [serial on the Internet]. 2004 Oct 9; [cited: 15 October 2004]; 329: [about 10 screens]. Available from: sis.nlm.nih.gov/Tox/ToxMain.html
Frangioni G, Bianchi S, Fuzzi G, Borgioli G. Dynamics of hepatic melanogenesis in newts in recovery phase from hypoxia. Open Zoo J 2009; 2: 1-7. Available from: https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOZJ-2-1 [cited: 26th Jan 2009]
Abood S. Quality improvement initiative in nursing homes: the ANA acts in an advisory role. Am J Nurs [serial on the Internet]. June 2002 [cited: 12th Aug 2002]; 102(6): [about 3 p.]. Available from: www.nursingworld.org/AJN/2002/june/Wawatch.htm.
Some important points to remember
Date of access should be provided for online citations.
Avoid using superscript in the in-text citations and reference section.
Abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications (which can only be included if prior permission has been obtained) should not be given in the references section. The details may however appear in the footnotes.
The authors are encouraged to use a recent version of EndNote (version 5 and above) or Reference Manager (version 10) when formatting their reference list, as this allows references to be automatically extracted.
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.
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
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.
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.
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 data supporting the findings of the article is available in the [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number]”.
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.
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
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.
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
MOOSE: Meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology must be reported according to MOOSE guideline ( http://www.ijo.in/documents/14MOOSE_SS.pdf )
All authors must strictly follow the guidelines below for preparing illustrations for publication in
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 email@example.com
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.
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:
Bentham Science 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 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.)
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.
The cost for color figures/plates/illustrations is
Color figures should be supplied in CMYK and not RGB colors.
Chemical structures must be prepared in ChemDraw/CDX and provided as separate file.
[As according to the ACS style sheet]
18% of width
14.4 pt (0.500cm, 0.2in)
2.0 pt (0.071cm, 0.0278in)
0.6 pt (0.021cm, 0.0084in)
1.6 pt (0.096cm)
2.5 pt (0.088cm, 0.0347in)
Times New Roman
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
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 Excel spreadsheet.
Bentham Science Publishers requires that all individuals listed as authors must have made a substantial contribution to the design, performance, analysis, or reporting of the work. The role of authors is judged on the basis of ICMJE and COPE guidelines.
All contributing authors are required to sign a copyright letter, mentioning complete details, including full name, affiliation, email address, ORCID ID and their role in the article. After successful electronic submission of a manuscript, a system-generated acknowledgement will be sent to all authors on their provided email addresses.
The Corresponding Author must provide a final list of authors at the time of submission, ensuring the correct sequence of the names of authors, which will not be considered for any addition, deletion or rearrangement after final submission of the manuscript. The email address of the principal author should be provided with an asterisk. However, the complete address, business telephone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail address of the corresponding author must be stated to receive correspondence and galley proofs. Bentham Science Publishers recommends that all contributors regularly update their profiles on SCOPUS/ORCID and other databases.
The corresponding author must have the approval of all other listed authors for the submission and publication of all versions of the manuscript.
Authors are strongly recommended to use their ORCID ID when submitting an article for consideration. Alternatively, they can acquire an ORCID ID via the submission process. For more information about ORCID IDs, visit here.
At the time of initial submission, the finalized list of authors in correct sequence should be provided, which will not be changed once the publication process has started.
If any change is essential, then it can only be done after the approval of the Editor-in-Chief upon receiving the following details from the corresponding author:
- The reason for the change in the author list and/or their sequence
- A proper justification should be provided for changes in authorship.
- Correction of existing names should be accompanied by a notice to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.
Any amendment to the authors' list will only be considered and approved by the Editor-in-Chief after complete verification. Publication of the manuscript will be withheld during consideration of the request. However, if the manuscript has already been published online, requests approved thereafter by the Editor-in-Chief will result in an erratum or corrigendum. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining permission from all co-authors for any changes in the authorship.
Here is some advice by COPE on authorship issues. Bentham strives to follow these guidelines.
Bentham Science Publishers recognizes that authors use a variety of tools for preparing articles related to their scientific works, ranging from simple ones to very sophisticated ones.
According to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, "AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements".
The pertinence of such tools may vary and evolve with public opinion, due to which the use of AI-powered language tools has led to a significant debate. These tools may generate useful results, but they can also lead to errors or misleading results; therefore, it is important to know which tools were used for evaluating and interpreting a particular scientific work.
Considering the above we require that:
- The authors to report any significant use of such tools in their works, such as instruments and software along with text-to-text generative AI consistent with subject standards for methodology.
- All co-authors should sign a declaration that they take full responsibility for all of its contents, regardless of how the contents were generated. Inappropriate language, plagiarized and biased contents, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content generated by AI language tools and the relevant results reported in scientific works are the full and shared responsibility of all the authors, including co-authors.
- AI language tools should not be listed as an author; instead, authors should follow clause (1) above.
Advice on how to spot authorship problems
Corresponding author requests addition of extra author before publication
Corresponding author requests removal of the author before publication
Request for addition of extra author after publication
Request for removal of author after publication
Activities such as the acquisition of funding, general supervision of a research group or general administrative support, writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading alone do not qualify any contributor for authorship. Such contributors may be acknowledged individually or together as a group in the acknowledgement section. Further details for writing acknowledgements are available here. Persons not meeting authorship criteria can be acknowledged in the acknowledgement section of the article rather than being enlisted as authors.
All contributing authors should contribute substantially to the article and sign the copyright letter. Bentham Science Publishers discourages authorship based solely on position (e.g., a research supervisor or a departmental head). We use COPE guidelines for identifying any suspected ghost, guest or gift authorship.
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
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.
No page charges will be levied to authors for the publication of their article. However, for research articles, the publication charges are $190USD. The authors may also decide for some paid-for editorial services such as open access publication and/or a faster overall publication for their article(s).
For this journal, an optional fast publication fee-based service called QUICK TRACK is available to authors for their submitted manuscripts.
QUICK TRACK allows online publication within 2 weeks of receipt of the final approved galley proofs from the authors. Similarly, the manuscript can be published in the next forthcoming PRINT issue of the journal. The total publication time, from date of first receipt of manuscript to its online publication is 12 weeks, subject to its acceptance by the referees and modification (if any) by the authors within one week.
The author will be initially charged a small fee on receipt of the agreement form for Quick Track publication to partially cover the initial costs incurred for expedited processing of the submitted manuscript. Later, the full Quick Track publication fee (US$ 730 per article charges) will be payable in advance, after acceptance of the manuscript, before online publication of the article. However, if the article is rejected at the peer-review stage, then the US$ 730 per article charges will not be charged.
Please note that whether the author opts for the QUICK TRACK facility or not, standard reviewing practices will be followed, which will not in any way affect the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Authors who have availed QUICK TRACK services in a BSP journal will be entitled for an exclusive 30% discount if they again wish to avail the same services in any Bentham journal.
For more information, please contact the Editorial Office by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Bentham Science offers a 50% discount off the Quick Track Publication 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.
Bentham Science offers three major services related to its publications:
- Subscription services (to subscribers, institutes, libraries, customers, etc.): Involving access to published content based on certain charges for corporates, academic institutes, and individuals.
- Editorial / Author Pre-publication services (to editors, authors, etc.): Quick track processing, language editing, etc.
- Editorial / Author Post-publication Promotional Services (to authors, institutions and organizations): Open Access Plus, Animated Abstracts, Sharing PDF on KUDOS, reprints, etc.
Since these services are optional in nature and are offered for specific services rendered, hence refunds are not allowed against the availed and charged services, except under special cases.
Bentham Science also offers authors the choice of “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” publication
of articles at a fee of
Authors who select the “Quick Track” publication option (see below) and also wish to have their
article made available on an “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” basis will be entitled to a
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
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
Bentham Science offers discounts to those corresponding authors who are based in low-income countries*.
The authors who wish to avail this offer should request for a discount at the time of submission of their manuscripts to Bentham Science.
Bentham Science offers 50% discount on the Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) Fee, Quick Track Fee and Article Processing Charges (APC) for manuscripts of the corresponding authors based in countries categorized as low-income economies by World Bank (list given below).
For any query or suggestion, please contact us on email@example.com.
- Central African Republic
- Congo, Rep.
- Marshall Islands
- Sierra Leone
- Yemen, Rep.
- Côte d'Ivoire
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
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,
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
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.
Bentham Science Publishers strictly follows the COPE guidelines to detect plagiarism; for more clear insight, authors may refer to flowcharts provided by COPE by clicking here or by visiting COPE website.
The text of every submitted manuscript is checked by using the Content Tracking mode in iThenticate. The Content Tracking mode ensures that manuscripts with an overall low percentage similarity (but which may have a higher similarity from a single source) are not overlooked. If the similarity level is significantly high, then the manuscript is returned to the author for paraphrasing the text and citing the original source of the copied material.
It is important to mention that the text taken from different sources with an overall low similarity percentage will be considered as a plagiarized content if the majority of the article is a combination of copied material.
There may be some manuscripts with an overall low similarity percentage, but a higher percentage from a single source. For instance, a manuscript may have less than 20% overall similarity but there may be 15 % similar text taken from a single article; the similarity index in such cases is higher than the approved limit for a single source. Authors are advised to thoroughly rephrase the similar text and properly cite the original source to avoid plagiarism and copyright violation.
We all know that scholarly manuscripts are written after a thorough review of previously published articles. It is therefore, not easy to draw a clear boundary between legitimate representation and plagiarism. However, the following important features can assist in identifying different kinds of plagiarized content. These are:
Reproduction of others words, sentences, ideas or findings as one’s own without proper acknowledgement.
Text recycling, also known as self-plagiarism. It is an author’s use of a previous publication in another paper without proper citation and acknowledgment of the original source.
Paraphrasing poorly: Copying complete paragraphs and modifying a few words without changing the structure of original sentences or changing the sentence structure but not the words.
Verbatim copying of text without putting quotation marks and not acknowledging the work of the original author.
Properly citing a work but poorly paraphrasing the original text is considered as unintentional plagiarism. Similarly, manuscripts with language somewhere between paraphrasing and quoting are not acceptable. Authors should either paraphrase properly or quote and in both cases, cite the original source.
Higher similarity in the abstract, introduction, materials and methods, and discussion and conclusion sections indicates that the manuscript may contain plagiarized text. Authors can easily explain these parts of the manuscript in many ways. However, technical terms and sometimes standard procedures cannot be rephrased; therefore Editors must review these sections carefully before making a decision.
Published manuscripts which are found to contain plagiarized text are retracted from the journal website after careful investigation and approval by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. A ‘Retraction Note’ as well as a link to the original article is published on the electronic version of the plagiarized manuscript and an addendum with retraction notification in the journal concerned.
For further details, please visit: https://www.benthamscience.com/research-misconduct
To ensure the scholarly integrity of every article, Bentham Science will publish post-publication notices. The authors of the published articles, or those who have submitted the manuscripts with false information, or fabricated the supporting data or images, will be liable for sanctions, and their papers will be retracted. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: https://www.benthamscience.com/fabricating-stating-false-information
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
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.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is an advisory body that ensures the highest standards of editorial practice in scholarly publishing, by providing guidance to editors and publishers in all aspects of publication ethics.
Pharmaceutical Nanotechnology is committed to upholding ethical standards in scholarly publishing. This journal is affiliated with COPE and adheres to its guidelines. To learn more about COPE guidelines, visit COPE website.
Responsibility for the content published by Bentham Science Publishers (BSP) in any of its journals, including any opinions expressed therein, rests exclusively with the author(s) of such content. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, BSP (on its own behalf, and on behalf of its staff and members of its editorial board) disclaims responsibility for any and all injury and/or damage (whether financial or otherwise) to persons or property, resulting directly or indirectly from any ideas, methods, instructions or products (including errors in the same) referred to in the content of any of BSP’s journals. Any dispute arising, including any claim, shall be governed exclusively by the laws of the United Arab Emirates, as applied in the Emirate of Sharjah
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 firstname.lastname@example.org