Manuscript Review Process
Editorial and peer-review process: The article submitted for publication to KIJTS is first examined by editors of the journal for scanning & assessment of standard of the article. The authors are advised that they would authorize one of them to correspond with the Journal for all matters related to the manuscript. All manuscripts received are duly acknowledged. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious scientific or technical flaws, or lack of a significant message are rejected before proceeding for formal peer-review. Manuscripts that are unlikely to be for Ayurveda and Yoga readers are also liable to be rejected at this stage only. The editor decides whether to forward the article for peer review or to return the article to authors for modification to meet the Uniform standard requirements of manuscript submission in KIJTS. The journal follows a double-blind review process followed by plagiarism software, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process. Please remove all identifying features such as author(s) affiliations from the article, ensuring that Author’s identity is not revealed. Based on the editor’s decision, the article is forwarded anonymously to two subject experts for adjudication. The adjudicatory comments (if any) and suggestions (acceptance/ rejection/ amendments in manuscript) received from reviewers are again referred anonymously to the corresponding author for necessary modifications. If required, the author is requested to provide a point by point response to reviewers’ comments and make the amendments in the article are to be highlighted separately and then submit a revised version of the manuscript. The Editorial Board again examines the modified article Reviewers are invited to review the revised manuscript if they wish so . All the reviewers are communicated with the final decision arriving on the manuscript they have reviewed initially conveys the publication status of the article. The whole process of submission of the manuscript to final decision and sending and receiving proofs is completed online..During the process of publication, the editorial office sends proofs to authors for checking which is to be returned within three days after checking the setting, tables, figures etc.
Authorship: A manuscript will be considered for publication based on the below understanding:
- All named authors should agree to its submission
- It is not currently being considered for the publication by another journal
- If the paper is accepted, it will not be subsequently published in the same or similar form in any language without the consent of publishers Any changes to the author list after submission, viz., a change in the order of the authors, deletion or addition of the authors needs to be approved by a signed letter from each author
Copyright: Submission of the manuscript represents that the manuscript has not been published previously and is not considered for publication elsewhere. Authors would be required to sign a Copy Right Transfer Agreement Form once the manuscript is accepted.
Gallery Proofs: Unless indicated otherwise, galley proofs are sent to the address given for correspondence. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that the galley proofs are returned without delay.
Privacy Statement: The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
Author Fees :
- This journal charges the following author fees.
- Article Submission: 1400.00 (INR)
- Authors are required to pay zero rupees for an Article Submission never pay Fee as part of the submission process to contribute to review costs.
- If this paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.
Disclaimer: No responsibility is assumed by KIJTS, publisher, its staff or board members for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products instructions, advertisements or ideas contained in a publication by KIJTS.
Note: Authors are requested to send their articles strictly according to the given format mentioned in the guidelines to the authors.
Reviewers Guidelines
All the manuscripts undergo a two-stage review process, the review is being done simultaneously by a minimum of two members of the international scientific committee. All articles that go through a rigorous double-blind peer review system.
Check List for Peer Reviewers
- Before starting, ensure that you are free from any conflicts of interest and that you’re aware of our confidentiality requirements and the basic principles of peer review.
- Does the paper meet a high standard of scientific quality and credibility?
- Is the paper readable and appropriately presented?
- Are the authors credible?
- Does the paper contain appropriate referencing and any recognisable plagiarism?
- Is the paper compliant with the aims and scope of the journal it is submitted to?
- Does the paper contain disqualified content?
- Does the paper meet ethical requirements?
- Other things to remember: your review must be a minimum of one large paragraph in length and must demonstrate a full critical engagement with the paper. Please don’t include explicit statements on whether the paper should be published or not. If your review doesn’t meet these criteria your review will not be used by the Editor in Chief or Associate Editor in charge.
Basic Principles of Peer Review
Peer reviewers are asked to provide thoughtful and unbiased feedback to authors to ensure that the conclusions of papers are valid and supported by the data and manuscripts achieve reasonable standards. Reviewers should focus on the science of the paper.
Scientific Quality and Credibility
The arguments and conclusions of the paper under review should be valid and supported by data reported in the paper or referenced in other papers. The paper under review should be written in technical language fit for a scientific journal.
Readability and Presentation
The paper under review should read without difficulty. If the paper under review reads badly you should recommend copy editing as a condition of acceptance.
Referencing and Plagiarism
The paper under review should be free from in-referenced material published elsewhere. If you identify material that appears to be plagiarized please inform editor@academicplus.org. The matter will be referred to the Editor in Chief.
Suitability for the Journal
The paper under review should fit comfortably within the aims and scope of the journal it has been submitted to.
The paper under review should not be likely to bring the journal into disrepute should it be published owing to the paper’s content or the content of other papers published elsewhere by the same author(s).
Validation of Data
Results should be capable of being reproduced.
Authors
Authors should disclose their affiliations and work at credible recognized private or public institutions.
Disqualified Content
Papers under review containing content which is unscholarly or generally regarded as pseudo-sciences are not acceptable for publication under any circumstances. Some disqualified content is listed below but the list is not exhaustive.
If the paper under review contains any such material declare it in your review and recommend rejection.
Ethical considerations
KIJTS requires authors to confirm that they have complied with all necessary ethical requirements around identifiable human subjects and experiments involving humans and animals, both when their paper is submitted and prior to publication.
Declaring a Conflict of Interest
You may not undertake a peer review if you are unable to do so objectively.
If you have agreed to review a paper and subsequently identify a potential conflict of interest, inform editor immediately and do not continue your review. Reviewers in a conflict of interest may not suggest alternative reviewers.
Financial and Commercial Conflicts of Interest
You are deemed to be in a conflict of interest and therefore disqualified from undertaking a peer review if you have, or have had in the past two years, any commercial associations or financial interests which may be construed as posing a conflict of interest, including but not limited to consultancies, employment, expert testimony, honoraria, retainers, stock holdings or options, and memberships on boards of for-profit organizations with a financial interest in the work under review.
Professional and Institutional Association
- You have worked at the same institution at any time in the past twenty-four months as an author of the paper under review.
- You have co-authored a paper, chapter, monograph, abstract or poster with an author of the paper in the past forty-eight months.
Social and Familial Association
- You have a personal social association with an author of the paper under review.
- You are a family member of any of the authors of the paper under review.
Other Disqualifications
- You have ever been subject to a professional disciplinary hearing.
- You are not currently working in the field of the paper under review.