All papers submitted for publication are immediately subjected to preliminary editorial scrutiny by the Editor-in-Chief regarding their suitability. The Editor-in-Chief determines if the manuscript
(a) falls within the scope of the journal and
(b) meets the editorial criteria of Bentham Science Publishers in terms of originality and quality.
Manuscripts that appear to be suitable are then subjected to single/ double blind peer-review by, usually two, neutral eminent experts. The services of eminent international experts are sought through invitations to conduct the peer-review of a submitted manuscript, keeping in view the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of the reviewers. The identity of the reviewers is not disclosed to the authors. The anonymity of reviewers ensures objective and unbiased assessment of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Before sending the manuscripts to reviewers, Bentham Science seeks consent from potential reviewers about their availability and willingness to review. Correspondence between the editorial office of the journal and the reviewers is kept confidential. The reviewers are expected to provide their reports in a timely fashion since a prompt review leads to timely publication of a manuscript which is beneficial not only to the authors but to the scientific community as well.
The editorial process and peer-review workflow for each journal are taken care of by a team of Senior Editors, Editorial Board Members (EBMs) and dedicated Journal managers who have the required expertise in their specific fields.
The Editor-in-Chief may recommend the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript after considering the opinions of the independent referees, or he/she may take assistance and advice from other experts in the field, if needed.
The Editor-in-Chief and Senior Editors of a journal have the right to select reviewers for a particular manuscript considering the knowledge and experience of the reviewers.
After reviewing of the manuscript by at least two independent experts, in addition to the assessment of the Editor, the decision is relayed to the authors, which may be categorized as:
Accept without changes
Bentham Science requests not to have the manuscripts peer-reviewed by those experts who may have competing interest with the author(s) of a submitted manuscript. It is not possible for Editors to be aware of all competing interests; it is therefore expected that the reviewers would inform the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor if they notice any potential competing interest during the course of review of a manuscript. Moreover, the reviewers are expected to inform the Editors or editorial office of the journal if they have a conflict of interest in carrying out the review of a manuscript submitted by any author/contributor of the manuscript.
Papers which are delayed by the authors in revision for more than 30 days are required to be re-submitted as a new submission. Papers accepted for publication are typeset and proofs are dispatched to authors for any corrections prior to final publication.
Duan-Fang Liao Hunan University of Chinese Medicine Hunan (China)
Duan-fang Liao (MD,PhD), the former president of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, is now a Professor and the Director of Province Key Laboratory for Quality Evaluation of Bulk Herbs of Hunan, and Vice Director of the State Key Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Powder and Innovative Medicine of China. And he published more than 160 papers in SCI journals. Moreover, Dr Liao has been honored the “Outstanding Scientist of China” issued by the China Association for Science and Technology(CAST).