Editorial Guidelines for JBBS
Comprehensive Standards for Manuscript Evaluation and Editorial Decision-Making in Biotechnology and Biomedical Science
The Editor's Critical Role
As a JBBS editor, you serve as a guardian of scientific quality, ensuring published research meets rigorous standards of methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and transparent reporting. Your editorial judgment shapes journal reputation and advances biotechnology and biomedical science.
These guidelines provide structured evaluation criteria for both experienced editors and those new to editorial responsibilities.
Manuscript Evaluation Checklist
Systematically evaluate every manuscript across these critical dimensions to maintain JBBS quality standards:
Title & Abstract
- Title: Clear, concise, informative, accurately reflects content
- Abstract: Hypothesis/purpose in first paragraph
- Methods: Briefly but clearly described
- Results: Summarized with key data and statistics
- Conclusions: Explicitly stated findings
- Keywords: Relevant terms for discoverability
Introduction
- General problem introduced early and clearly
- Research questions precisely stated and testable
- Hypothesis clearly articulated
- Study assumptions explicitly identified
- Problem significance and research justification provided
- Literature review current and relevant (recent 3 years)
- Citations from primary sources supporting rationale
- Relationship to previous work established
Methods & Materials
- Subject population adequately described
- Human subjects: IRB approval + informed consent
- Animal subjects: Ethical approval + care guidelines (ARRIVE)
- Sampling methods justified
- Study design appropriate for hypothesis
- Controls included where necessary
- Variables clearly identified
- Methods detailed enough for replication
- Statistical tests appropriate for design
Results
- Output clear, precise, logically organized
- Sufficient information answers research questions
- Statistical values reported (p-values, CI)
- Statistics relevant to hypothesis
- Tables/figures complete and understandable
- No duplication between tables and figures
- Figure legends comprehensive
Discussion
- Conclusions clearly stated, evidence-based
- Hypothesis revisited in context of results
- Findings discussed with implications
- Generalizations appropriate to population
- Bias and potential errors acknowledged
- Previous research cited relevantly
- Study limitations identified and discussed
- Future research directions suggested
References & Form
- References properly formatted per journal style
- Primary sources (journals) prioritized
- Reference guidelines:
- - Research: 20-30 references
- - Case reports: 3-10 references
- - Reviews: 50-150 references
- Report clear and logically organized
- Tone impartial, unbiased, scientific
Editorial Decision Process
Initial Screening
Before peer review, conduct an initial assessment to determine manuscript suitability:
- Scope alignment: Confirm fit with JBBS Aims & Scope
- Format compliance: Check adherence to Instructions for Authors
- Language quality: Assess clarity for international readership; recommend language editing if needed
- Plagiarism check: Use similarity detection software
- Ethics verification: Confirm required approvals and disclosures
Desk Rejection: Manuscripts clearly out of scope or with severe flaws may be rejected without review. Provide clear reasoning and suggest alternatives or improvements when appropriate.
Decision Guidelines
- Accept: Scientifically sound, requires only minor editorial corrections
- Minor Revision: Solid science, needs improvements in clarity or limited additional data
- Major Revision: Significant concerns requiring new experiments or substantial restructuring
- Reject: Fundamental flaws, ethical breaches, or severe scope misalignment
Timely Processing: Aim for initial decisions within 4-6 weeks. Provide impartial evaluation with specific feedback. Multiple revision rounds are acceptable to achieve quality standards.
Reviewer Management
- Select reviewers with appropriate expertise in research area and methodology
- Avoid conflicts of interest (collaborators, competitors, same institution)
- Respect author requests to exclude specific reviewers when justified
- Send PDFs to reviewers (not editable Word files) with clear guidelines
- Provide reasonable deadlines (typically 14 days)
Ethical Responsibilities
JBBS editors must uphold the highest ethical standards aligned with COPE guidelines:
Core Ethical Principles:
- Unbiased Evaluation: Judge manuscripts on scientific merit alone, without regard to author race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation
- Timely Processing: Handle manuscripts with reasonable speed. Editors hold sole responsibility for acceptance/rejection decisions
- Confidentiality: Do not disclose manuscript content except to those involved in evaluation. Accepted titles/authors may be shared publicly after acceptance
- Intellectual Independence: Respect author autonomy and avoid imposing preferences that compromise scientific integrity
- Conflict Management: Editor-authored manuscripts must be handled by another qualified person. Delegate editorial responsibility when conflicts exist
- No Competitive Advantage: Never use unpublished information in your own research without author consent
- Error Correction: If published work contains errors, facilitate publication of corrections or retractions
- Reviewer Communication: Provide clear guidelines and protect reviewer anonymity per review model (single-blind vs double-blind)
Additional Guidance
- Tables & Figures: Ensure clear presentation without manipulation. Advanced formats (2D/3D) acceptable if they enhance readability. No duplication between tables and figures
- Language Standards: Manuscripts must be understandable to international readers. Recommend editing services for language issues without rejecting scientifically sound work
- Feedback Specificity: Note errors with line numbers, provide both error identification and suggested corrections
- Out-of-Scope Submissions: Reject promptly with explanation and suggestions for alternative venues
- Communication: Maintain professional, constructive tone in all editor-author interactions
Join the JBBS Editorial Team
Contribute to advancing biotechnology and biomedical science by serving as a JBBS editor. Your expertise shapes the future of scientific publishing.
Questions or Support? Contact the JBBS editorial team at [email protected] for guidance on manuscript handling, ethical concerns, or editorial processes.
