Peer review is an integral part of the publication cycle. It involves an independent and unbiased assessment by reviewers of a manuscript on the grounds of originality, significance, and novelty of the study.
Peer reviews have always been the cornerstone for every scientific and scholarly communication. In fact, the peer review process accounts for originality, clarity, and transparency of all research findings. A rigorous peer-review process is essential for building trust within the scientific community.

Papers submitted to Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia Journal are subject to accurate peer review so as to ensure that the research published is quality content.

Before the beginning of the refereeing process, manuscripts are initially screened by the editors. At this stage, manuscripts may be rejected directly by the editors if deemed to be beyond the scope of the journal, or scientifically or linguistically substandard.

Manuscripts that have successfully gone through the screening stage are then sent out for review and all correspondence takes place via e-mail. Although the peer-review process is accelerated by the use of electronic communication, high-quality peer-review standards are applied to all manuscripts submitted to the journal.

Each manuscript is sent to at least two independent referees. Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia Journal employs a ‘double-blind’ review process: authors are not told who reviewed their paper, and reviewers are not told who wrote the paper. Members of the editorial team cannot be peer reviewers.

Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinion on a number of issues pertinent to the scientific and formal aspects of the paper and to evaluate papers on grounds of originality, quality of empirical work and argument, quality of research methodology or/and argumentation and quality of written language. In addition, non-discriminatory language is mandatory; sexist or racist terms should not be used, and their presence will result in immediate rejection by the editors.

The review process is done using the Manuscript Management System. Reviewers make one of the following recommendations:

• Accept Unconditionally
• Accept Conditionally
• Reject in Current Form
• Reject Unconditionally

All relevant information is forwarded to the author(s) to address the reviewer’s comments and highlight the changes in the manuscript accordingly. The revisions should be made according to reviewer comments along with their response on each specified comment. The author should send his views and consent through author response form to the reviewer for re-evaluation. The author has a right to disagree with the reviewer’s comments and can justify the disagreement in the author response form. The maximum time of the revision will be 10 days based on major or minor revisions.

The final decision to accept or reject the paper and the recommendation is of handling editors who have been responsible for the evaluation of the paper.

All peer-review reports and related correspondence will be archived by the journal. This documentation may be made available to a third party in the event of an audit.