Journals published by 'CENTRE FOR INFO BIO
TECHNOLOGY' [CIBTech] follows double blind
peer review process, where both reviewers
and authors remain anonymous throughout the
Article received from the corresponding
author must follow our Journals format.
Article is checked by the Editor-in-Chief
and it is forwarded to the editor/reviewer
only if it is found having some original
content and some significance to the
readers. Further process and criteria for
reviewing is mentioned below.
Aim of the work presented in the article
must reflect degree of originality in the
article. Reviewer can look for
conceptual advancement over previously
published work. Any major omission of the
previously published findings on the similar
problem must be checked.
Article must be technically presented.
Interpretation of Result: The discussion
should hover around the result and should
not include irrelevant and unachievable
Statistical Presentation: Reviewer must
check whether proper statistics has been
applied by the author over the data wherever
Plagiarism of Data: Data showing any type of
suspicion, duplication and manipulation must
be brought to the notice of the author(s)
Plagiarized article will be out rightly
returned and rejected for further and future
review. Same rule applies for
If copyrighted material is used in the
manuscript, full attribution must be
provided in the text. Author must send the
proof of permission to the editorial office
for such referred work. It is the
responsibility of the authors, to properly
attribute the data or text or image
previously published elsewhere.
Reviewer will pin
point the strength and weakness of the
article considering potential importance of
the work in present and future context.
Finally, reviewer(s) can recommend necessary
corrections (if needed) to accept the paper.
Reviewer will review complete
manuscript in any case, until and unless the
paper appears absolutely fake or of poorest
standard. All the suggestions for
corrections (by the reviewer or editorial
board members) must be written on the
reviewer’s report, available in our website.
Reviewers are requested to avoid any
personalized remarks. If found unsuitable
the paper should be declared as unacceptable
for publication. Reviewer/editor must send
the report [regarding
suggestions/acceptance/rejection of the
article] via email. Reviewer can
click here to
download the report’s copy
Author has to return the article within two
to three week’s time after making the
corrections/changes as asked by the
reviewer(s). Author will get only two
opportunities to correct the article. After
that, failing to satisfy the reviewer’s
queries will automatically lead to article’s
Review Time: The article must be reviewed
within one to two months. In exceptional
cases the deadline can be extended further.
Authors are further recommended to go
Terms and Conditions and
Instructions for Authors
WebPages before submitting their
journal requires that all authors
disclose any potential sources of
conflict of interest.