Peer Review Process

AyuPrabha follows a double‑blind peer review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. This helps minimize bias and ensures that editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific quality, originality and ethical standards of the work.

1.Initial editorial screening

• After submission, the editorial team checks whether the manuscript fits the journal’s scope, follows the Author Guidelines (including formatting, ethics statements and ORCID details) and meets basic quality standards.

• Manuscripts may be returned to authors at this stage for technical corrections or declined if clearly unsuitable.

2.Assignment to reviewers

• Manuscripts that pass initial screening are anonymized and sent to two or more independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

• Reviewers assess the scientific rigor, methodological soundness, clarity of presentation, ethical compliance and relevance to Ayurveda and integrative health.

3.Reviewer reports and decisions

• Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept

• Minor revision

• Major revision

• Reject

• For revisions, authors are expected to respond point‑by‑point to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised manuscript within the specified time.

4.Final decision and acceptance

• The editor evaluates the revised manuscript, and may seek further review if needed.

• Once a manuscript is accepted, it proceeds to copy‑editing, proof preparation and publication, subject to payment of the applicable Article Processing Charges (APCs).

The journal aims to conduct peer review in a timely manner; however, actual timelines may vary depending on the availability of suitable reviewers and the complexity of the manuscript.