Expertise
Confirm that the topic and methods fall within your current subject knowledge.
Independent assessment · JAPST
For Reviewers
Reviewers evaluate whether the methods, evidence, interpretation and reporting support the manuscript's contribution to pharmaceutical science, technology or practice.
- Confidentiality
- Required
- Conflicts
- Disclose promptly
- Deadline
- Set in invitation
- Decision
- Made by editor
Release profile
01
Before accepting the review
Accept only when the manuscript is within your expertise and an independent, confidential review can be completed by the invitation deadline.
Conflicts
Disclose personal, financial, professional, institutional, collaborative or competitive conflicts and decline when impartial review is not possible.
Deadline
Use the deadline stated in the invitation. Decline or request an extension promptly when the review cannot be completed in that period.
Double-blind manuscripts
For double-blind manuscripts, reviewers must not attempt to identify the authors.
02
Scientific assessment
Separate essential scientific concerns from optional suggestions and support each major point with a clear rationale.
- Research question and fit with the Aims and Scope
- Study design, controls and methodological rigor
- Sample size, statistics, uncertainty and exclusions
- Results supported by the reported data
- Interpretation distinguished from speculation
- Limitations and alternative explanations
- Reproducibility and data availability
- Figures, tables and supplementary material
- Ethics, consent, trial registration and animal welfare
- Funding, sponsor role and competing interests
03
Pharmaceutical-science checks
Apply only the checks relevant to the manuscript's study type and claims.
Formulation
Composition, grades, preparation sequence, controls, characterization and performance evidence.
Analytical validation
Intended use, calibration, range, accuracy, precision, selectivity, sensitivity and robustness where applicable.
Stability
Conditions, packaging, intervals, acceptance criteria and stability-indicating methods.
PK and biopharmaceutics
Design, dosing, sampling, analysis and interpretation of exposure, response, safety or biopharmaceutic performance.
Manufacturing and quality
Scale, equipment, process variables, critical quality attributes, validation and controls.
Material provenance
Supplier, manufacturer, lot or catalog identifiers and authentication of biological materials where relevant.
Drug discovery and pharmacology
Drug or target identity, dose and exposure, assay suitability, controls, selectivity, response measures and the limits of mechanistic or therapeutic claims.
Natural products and pharmacognosy
Authenticated source material, extraction and characterization, batch or constituent information, appropriate biological controls and evidence for safety and activity.
Clinical research and pharmacy practice
Population, medicine exposure or pharmacy intervention, relevant outcomes, confounding, ethics, consent and transparent interpretation of associations.
Case reports and computational studies
For cases, report the clinical timeline, medicine exposure, alternative explanations and required consent. For computation, report data provenance, evaluation, validation and limitations.
04
Review report and recommendation
The report should help the editor assess the record and help the authors understand the evidence-based revisions requested.
Comments for authors
- Summarize the question and contribution
- List major comments on methods, evidence and interpretation
- List minor comments on clarity, presentation and references
- Identify which requested changes are essential
Confidential comments to the editor
State concerns that should not be shared directly, including conflicts, integrity evidence or publication-status questions.
Recommendation
Recommend accept, minor revision, major revision or reject and explain the recommendation. The editor makes the editorial decision.
05
Confidentiality, AI and integrity escalation
Do not investigate authors publicly or contact them directly about the manuscript.
Confidential handling
Do not share manuscript content or use unpublished material. After submitting the review, reviewers should securely delete downloaded manuscript files and must not retain or use unpublished material.
AI-assisted review
Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured.
Escalate privately
Report suspected plagiarism, data or image manipulation, ethics breaches or undisclosed conflicts confidentially to the editor. Preserve the evidence and avoid making accusations in comments intended for the authors.
Editorial independence
Reviewing confers no advantage in the review or acceptance of the reviewer's own manuscripts.
Questions about an assigned review?
Contact the JAPST editorial office about conflicts, extensions, files or integrity concerns.
Email reviewer support