Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Guidelines

FARMASAINS: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Kefarmasian

FARMASAINS is committed to maintaining the highest standards of peer-review integrity. After initial editorial screening, manuscripts undergo a double-blind review by at least two independent experts. All published articles have passed rigorous evaluation involving editor assessment, anonymous peer review, and author revisions where required.

We appreciate the essential contribution of reviewers in ensuring the scientific quality of the journal.

Reviewer Benefits

Reviewers receive a personalized Reviewer Certificate 

Reviewer Expectations

Invited reviewers are asked to:

  • Accept or decline invitations promptly based on the title and abstract.

  • Request additional time if needed to complete the review.

  • Evaluate the manuscript’s originality, significance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, scientific soundness, reader relevance, overall merit, and the quality of Indonesian language (if applicable).

  • Provide an overall recommendation and a detailed, constructive report.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

All manuscript content must remain confidential. FARMASAINS uses a double-blind system; reviewers should avoid revealing their identity in comments or file metadata. Review reports may only be disclosed with the reviewer’s explicit permission.

Call for Reviewers

FARMASAINS welcomes experts interested in contributing as Reviewers or Editorial Board members. Interested scholars may register through the provided form.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Responsibilities Toward Authors

  • Provide timely, unbiased, and evidence-based evaluations.

  • Ensure comments are clear, relevant, and constructive.

  • Avoid personal or financial conflicts of interest.

  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the process.

Responsibilities Toward Editors

  • Notify the editor immediately if unable to perform the review.

  • Follow editorial instructions and journal standards.

  • Assess scientific merit, originality, and scope, and recommend improvements.

  • Provide clear, well-reasoned recommendations based on ethical principles.

  • Avoid any direct contact with authors without editorial permission.

Ethical Standards for Reviewers

  • Confidentiality: Review materials must not be shared or retained after the review is completed.

  • Constructive Evaluation: Feedback should support improvement without bias or inappropriate criticism.

  • Competence: Review only within areas of expertise; decline when lacking adequate knowledge.

  • Impartiality & Integrity: Decisions must be based solely on scientific merit, independent of author identity or background.

  • Timeliness: Reviews must be completed within the specified timeframe.