Review Policy

Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to the IBTC will be critically analyzed by the Editorial board containing editor- in- chief, executive editors and other members. IBTC adopts an unequivocal and indubitable policy of not accepting a paper instigating lingual, racial, parochial, sectarian and religious prejudices. Thus, a manuscript found to have any material giving air to above mentioned inimical prejudices or having some other material against the policy matter of the journal will be diametrically rejected and the editor- in- chief / editorial board has carte blanche in this regard.

This is further divided into the following significant steps.

  1. Double-Blind Peer-Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to IBTC undergo a strict “Double-Blind Peer-Review” process by means of which both author’s and reviewer’s identification is not divulged to each other in order to ensure a free and fair review and avoid any potential clash of interests. Relevant experts give scholarly comments to the editorial team regarding the aptness of their manuscripts for publication. The underlying idea is to ensure scholastic, academic quality and thoroughness of the publication process.


  1. Duration of Review and Publication

In the wake of emerging demands by the authors for an up to the mark review and publication, the journal has taken effective steps in order to accelerate the process yet without compromising on the quality of publication. “Desk Review” is the very first measure in this regard whereby a manuscript is screened by the chief editor himself/herself and/or allocated to the editorial board. It usually takes 10-20 days after submission of the manuscript in order to check similarity score, propriety of the study with the scope and objectives as propounded by the journal. Within a month, the corresponding author is informed via email regarding the decision of this initial screening. After a manuscript goes through this first step successfully, the paper undergoes, in the second step, a review process by the peers who are well versed in the field the manuscript deals with. These reviewers make comments on originality, contribution, suitability of flow of discussion and references cited in the study. After this, review reports are sent to all authors of the paper with a letter of acceptance conditioned to the realization of revisions in due course or repudiation /excuse. This step normally takes another 30-40 days. The third step includes sending revised copy to the copy-editors who look at proofreading and editing of the manuscript and their report is sent to the corresponding author, too. Authors are asked to submit the proofread and edited copy of the manuscript within 1-2 weeks after which manuscript is sent for production. Print copy is sent to corresponding author on request after publication. The journal has initiated an early online production system through which the advance copy of paper is published and available online before the hard copy publication.


  1. Editorial Role in the Review Process ad Clash of Interest Policy

In order to establish thoroughness and independence of review process, the articles are sent to scholars well-versed in the relevant domain. The reviewers are different from the editorial board members. The role of editorial-board members is to recommend the potential reviewers for the manuscripts and manage the review process assigned by the managing editor.
In order to avoid clash of interest, when papers are received from any of the editorial members, the chief-editor assigns such manuscript to alternate editorial member to carry on the review and publication process in order to maintain independence and impartiality.