Peer Review Policy

  1. Purpose of Peer Review

The peer review process of NextGen Chemical Discoveries is designed to ensure the scientific quality, originality, accuracy, and relevance of all manuscripts published in the journal. Peer review provides independent expert evaluation that helps maintain high academic and ethical standards.

  1. Type of Peer Review

NextGen Chemical Discoveries follows a single-blind peer review process, where:

  • Reviewers know the identity of the authors
  • Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers

This model allows reviewers to assess the work in its full academic context while preserving reviewer anonymity to encourage honest and unbiased feedback.

  1. Stages of the Review Process

3.1 Initial Editorial Assessment

  • All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editorial Office or an assigned Editor.
  • The assessment checks for:
    • Journal scope and relevance
    • Originality and novelty
    • Compliance with author guidelines
    • Ethical standards and plagiarism screening
  • Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage (desk rejection) without external peer review.

3.2 External Peer Review

  • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are sent to at least two independent expert reviewers.
  • Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, research experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.
  • Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on:
    • Scientific and technical soundness
    • Experimental design and methodology
    • Data analysis and interpretation
    • Originality and contribution to chemical sciences
    • Clarity, organization, and language quality

Reviewers submit detailed comments and recommend one of the following:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject
  1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
  • Maintain confidentiality of manuscript content
  • Declare any conflict of interest
  • Avoid personal criticism and focus on scientific merit
  • Refrain from using unpublished information for personal benefit
  1. Editorial Decision
  • Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated Associate Editor, considering reviewer recommendations and editorial judgment.
  • The editorial decision may include acceptance, request for revision, or rejection.
  • Reviewer comments (anonymous) are shared with authors.
  1. Revision and Resubmission
  • Authors invited to revise must submit:
    • A revised manuscript
    • A detailed point-by-point response to reviewer comments
  • Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers, especially in cases of major revision.
  • Failure to submit revisions within the stipulated time may result in rejection.
  1. Ethical Standards and Confidentiality
  • All manuscripts are handled as confidential documents throughout the review process.
  • The journal enforces strict policies against:
    • Plagiarism
    • Data fabrication or falsification
    • Duplicate or redundant publication
  • Ethical concerns are addressed according to the journal’s Publication Ethics Policy.
  1. Review Timeline
  • The journal aims to complete the initial decision within 6–8 weeks from the date of submission.
  • Delays may occur due to reviewer availability, but authors are kept informed of progress.
  1. Appeals and Complaints
  • Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal, reasoned appeal to the Editorial Office.
  • Appeals are reviewed by senior editors not involved in the original decision.
  • The decision following an appeal is final.
  1. Reviewer Acknowledgment
  • NextGen Chemical Discoveries may acknowledge reviewers annually for their contributions while maintaining reviewer anonymity and confidentiality.