The editorial process of Pharmacophore operates under the sole and final authority of the Editor-in-Chief, in coordination with the Editorial Board and assigned Associate Editors, ensuring full editorial independence.
Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the outcomes of a structured double-blind peer-review process, including evaluations by Associate Editors and independent external reviewers, while remaining strictly guided by scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical standards, and relevance to the journal scope.
The peer-review system follows a multi-stage evaluation process, including initial editorial screening, subject expert assessment, external peer review, and final editorial decision-making, ensuring transparency, fairness, and scientific integrity at every stage.
At least two independent favorable expert reviews are typically required for acceptance; in cases of conflicting recommendations, additional expert review may be sought to ensure an objective and evidence-based decision.
The publisher and affiliated organizations have no involvement in manuscript handling, reviewer selection, peer-review management, editorial assessment, or final publication decisions, including acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
Editors and Associate Editors are required to recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have any conflict of interest, ensuring unbiased and impartial evaluation throughout the editorial process.
Pharmacophore is committed to upholding editorial independence, transparency, and scientific integrity in accordance with COPE guidelines and internationally recognized standards of publication ethics.
