Double-blind peer review process
Asian Journal of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicines (ATCAM) has a double-blind peer review process. It means that neither the peer reviewers nor the authors know the names of each other.
The Editorial Process
A manuscript will be reviewed for possible publication with the understanding that it is being submitted to Asian Journal of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicines (ATCAM) alone at that point in time and has not been published anywhere, simultaneously submitted, or already accepted for publication elsewhere. The journal expects that authors would authorize one of them to correspond with the Journal for all matters related to the manuscript. All manuscripts received are duly acknowledged. On submission, editors review all submitted manuscripts initially for suitability for formal review. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious scientific or technical flaws, or lack of a significant message are rejected before proceeding for formal peer-review. Manuscripts that are unlikely to be of interest to the Asian Journal of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicines (ATCAM) readers are also liable to be rejected at this stage itself.
All manuscripts will be checked with iThenticate which is a Plagiarism Detection Software to detect plagiarism.
Manuscripts that are found suitable for publication in Asian Journal of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicines (ATCAM) are sent to two or more expert reviewers. During submission, the contributor is requested to provide names of two or three qualified reviewers who have had experience in the subject of the submitted manuscript, but this is not mandatory. The reviewers should not be affiliated with the same institutes as the contributor/s. However, the selection of these reviewers is at the sole discretion of the editor. The journal follows a double-blind review process, wherein the reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s identity. Every manuscript is also assigned to a member of the editorial team, who based on the comments from the reviewers takes a final decision on the manuscript. The comments and suggestions (acceptance/ rejection/ amendments in manuscript) received from reviewers are conveyed to the corresponding author. If required, the author is requested to provide a point by point response to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript.
Manuscripts accepted for publication are copy edited for grammar, punctuation, print style, and format. Page proofs are sent to the corresponding author. The corresponding author is expected to return the corrected proofs within three days. It may not be possible to incorporate corrections received after that period. The whole process of submission of the manuscript to final decision and sending and receiving proofs is completed online.