Research articles should be of 4000-6000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc .

The length of a published comprehensive review article is from 6000-10000 words with 100 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.

Systematic Reviews include systematic updates in review protocols, methods, research and results from all relevant fields for any studies and updates on already published issues. The total number of words for a published systematic review is from 4000 to 6000 words with 100 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines; ( www.prisma-statement.org).

Mini-reviews should be 3000- 6000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.

Letters should be 3000-4000 words with 40 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.

Trial studies should be 4000 to 6000 words with 50 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables etc .

This journal publishes Open Access reviews on recently published books (both print and electronic) relevant to the journal. The total number of words for a book reviews is 850 to 100 words excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc . Publishers and authors of books are invited to contact our book reviews editor at tocengj@benthamopen.net with book review requests. All submitted books will be reviewed by an independent expert in the field. No page charges will be levied to authors for the publication of book reviews.

Case reports should describe new observations of findings or novel/unique outcomes relevant to the field. The total number of words for a published case report is 1500 to 2500 words with 40 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc .

The articles should be contributed by eminent experts on cutting-edge recent developments. They should be written in the format of mini-reviews (about 4 to 5 pages, approximately 800 to 850 words per composed page excluding tables, structures, graphics, figures and captions) with about 70 references to recent literature. All pages should be numbered sequentially.

Editorials are short papers on important topics related to the journal. The total number of words in an editorial should not exceed 1000 to 1500, and it should contain only 10-15 references. An abstract is not required.

Commentaries present an analysis by scientists on different important issues related to the publications in the journal. Commentaries should contain less than 3000 words, including the abstract, main text, references, and figure legends. However, an abstract is not necessary.

A perspective provides a short overview of a research topic relevant to the field. The length of a published perspective ranges from 1500 to 1800 words, with 20 or more references, excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables, etc.

Industry News should provide important developments in industries related to the scope of the Journal that could be of interest to the readers. The length of the submission should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).

Patent News may present important information about recent important patents that have been granted, relevant to the scope of this journal. The length should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).

There is no restriction on the number of figures, tables or additional files e.g. video clips, animation and datasets, that can be included in each article online.

The manuscript should be written in English in a clear, direct and active style. All pages must be numbered sequentially, facilitating in the reviewing and editing of the manuscript.

It is advisable that authors prepare their manuscript using the template available on the Web, which will assist in preparation of the manuscript according to the journal’s format. Download the Template.

The title should be precise and brief and must not be of more than 120 characters. Authors should avoid the use of non-standard abbreviations and question marks in titles. The title must be written in title case except for articles, conjunctions and prepositions.

As recommended by the reporting guidelines, information about the study should be a part of the title (particularly for randomized or clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta analyses).

Authors should also provide a short ‘running title’. The title, running title, by line correspondent footnote and the keywords should be written as presented in the original manuscript.

The title page should include paper title, author(s) full name and affiliation, corresponding author(s) names and complete affiliation/address, along with phone, fax and email.

The abstract of an article should be a clear, concise and accurate summary, having no more than 250 words, and including the explicit sub-headings (as in-line or run-in headings in bold). Use of abbreviations should be avoided and the references should not be cited in the abstract.

All the original research articles, systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be accompanied by a structured abstract. Ideally, each abstract should include the following sub-headings, but these may vary according to the requirements of the article.

Introduction/Objective: Summarize the objective or purpose of the research in a few sentences.

Methods: Give a brief description of the research design, methodology, and other relevant details about the conduct of the study.

Results: Outline the main conclusions or findings of the study, often with statistical data or significant findings.

Conclusion: Provide an overview of the study's key findings and any implications

The headings can vary but must state the purpose of the study, details of the participants, measurements, methods, main findings and conclusion.

6 to 8 keywords must be provided. Keywords should be important and relevant so that researchers in this field be search for them so that and your paper should appear in top in a database search. The keywords should be contained in the title and they should appear several times in the article. In biomedical fields, MeSH terms are a good ‘common vocabulary’ source to draw keywords from https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html.

The main text should begin on a separate page and should be divided into title page, abstract and the main text. The text may be subdivided further according to the areas to be discussed, which should be followed by the List of Abbreviations (if any), Conflict of Interest, Acknowledgements and Reference sections. For review, the manuscript should be divided into title page, abstract and the main text. The text may be subdivided further according to the areas to be discussed, which should be followed by the Acknowledgements and Reference sections. The Review Article should mention any previous important recent and old reviews in the field and contain a comprehensive discussion starting with the general background of the field. It should then discuss the salient features of recent developments. The authors should avoid presenting any data or material which has already been published in a previous review. The authors are advised to present and discuss their observations in brief.

For Research Articles the manuscript should begin with the title page and abstract followed by the main text, which must be structured into separate sections as Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate, Human and Animal Rights, Conflict of Interest, Acknowledgements and References.

All randomized clinical trials must include a flow diagram and authors should provide a complete randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; ( www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol. For further details, please visit the complete guidelines at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html

For case reports, the authors should follow the CARE guidelines. The CARE checklist should be submitted as a separate file.

The manuscript style must be uniform throughout the text and 10 Times New Roman fonts should be used. The full term for an abbreviation should precede its first appearance in the text unless it is a standard unit of measurement. The reference numbers should be given in square brackets in the text. Italics should be used for Binomial names of organisms (Genus and Species), for emphasis and for unfamiliar words or phrases. Non-assimilated words from Latin or other languages should also be italicized e.g. per se, et al., etc.

If abbreviations are used in the text either they should be defined in the text where first used, or a list of abbreviations should be provided.

Bentham Open supports retrospective registration of systematic reviews, in a suitable registry (such as PROSPERO). The registered systematic review must include the registration number as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

All potential conflicts of interest (competing interests) that could have a direct or indirect influence on the work must be disclosed by the authors. Even if an author does not have a conflict, disclosing affiliations and interests allows for a more comprehensive and open approach, which leads to a more accurate and objective evaluation of the work. Conflicts of interest, whether genuine or imagined, are a perspective to which the readers are entitled.

The publication of a conflict statement in the article itself, as well as the submission of the conflict disclosure form, is required for all types of papers. It is not necessarily the case that a monetary relationship with examination support or funding for counseling work is inappropriate. Even if the authors do not have any conflict of interest, they still need to provide a confirmation statement in their manuscripts, i.e., “The author(s) confirm(s) that there is no conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”

The following are some examples of potential conflicts of interest that are directly or indirectly related to the research:

Financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

• Type of support/grant number
• Institutional Conflicts of Interest
• Funds received by the author
• Funds received by the institution
• Travel allowances for the research
• Funds received for article preparation and reviewing
• Funds for conducting review activities
• Support provided for article writing assistance, for drugs, equipment, etc
• Paid lectures
• Pending fund or grant

Financial conflicts of interest can be personal as well as institutional. A personal conflict of interest occurs when a contributor involved in the publication process either receives an amount of money or expects to receive some financial help (including any other financial benefits such as patents or stocks, gifts, or services) that may impact the work related to a specific publication. More importantly, in academic research, such financial relationships can lead to institutional conflicts of interest (COIs) because the economic interests of the institution or institutional representatives may unsuitably affect the decision-making process.

An institutional conflict of interest arises in a situation when the financial interests of an institution or any institutional official (e.g., investments held by the university in a company) have the potential to unduly influence the research conducted by its employees or students, or pose an unacceptable risk to human subjects. Such conflicts usually arise in a state of affairs where a research project directly offers assistance or a benefit to an external entity via evaluation, validation, trial, or test of an invention, product, drug, service, or technology, and the institution holds a financial interest with the external entity. Such financial interests incorporate, but are not limited to, the receipt of licensing payments or royalties from the external entity, or ownership interest with the external entity. When human subjects are involved in any research project, and the institution supports such a financial interest, the conflict of interest is speculated to be unreasonable.

Non-financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

In addition, interests other than monetary and any funding (non-financial interests) should be declared if they are relevant to readers. Personal relationships or conflicting interests directly or indirectly related to research, as well as professional interests or personal opinions that may impact your research, are examples of these.

Intellectual property, in basic terms, refers to any intangible property that is the result of creativity, such as patents, copyrights, etc. Similarly, this section seeks to know about copyright and patent (licensed patent, pending or issued) and any payment received for intellectual property, such as:

• Patent
• Licensed Patent
• Issued Patent
• Pending Patent
• Royalties
• Licensee
• Remarks

All conflict of interest disclosure forms are collected by the corresponding author. It is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors in author collaborations when legal agreements for representation allow it. The templates of the form can be found here.

• Disclosure form
• ICMJE disclosure form

Before the reference list, the corresponding author will include a summary statement in the text of the article that reflects what is reported in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form (s). Author(s) may declare(s) names of reviewers who they think might have a potential conflict of interest; therefore, the Editorial Office could avoid inviting such reviewers for an unbiased opinion.

Undisclosed conflict of interest cases before or after the publication of an article are dealt with as per the guidelines of COPE.

1. Undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted article (View COPE guidelines)
2. Undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article (View COPE guidelines)

For more information on COIs, see the guidance from the ICMJE.

Bentham Open tries to conduct a transparent peer-review process with the help of reviewers who do not have any conflict of interest with the authors. In this connection, reviewers who belong to the same institute or countries as authors are not invited to review manuscripts. However, it is not possible for the Editorial Office to be aware of all competing interests; therefore, it is expected from authors to submit:

• List of reviewers who they think have a conflict of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review process.

The Editorial Office expects reviewers:

• Not to accept manuscript review requests if they have any potential conflict of interest and inform the Editorial Office accordingly.
• To decline review requests if they have recently published or submitted an article with any of the authors listed in the manuscript.
• To inform the Editorial Office if they have any personal relationship with the authors or work in the same institutes as of authors, which could affect the review transparency.
• To abstain from reviewing and informing the Editorial Office/Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editors about any scientific misconduct or fraud, plagiarism, conflict of interest, or any other unethical behavior related to the manuscript.

During the submission of review comments, reviewers are asked to reconfirm that they do not have any conflict of interest related to the article. After confirming the below statement, they can submit their comments.

“I hereby confirm that I don’t have any conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”

If, however, there are still any remaining interests, then reviewers must mention those in the ‘Confidential’ section of the review form.

Reviewers are not encouraged to contact authors directly regarding any of their conflicts of interest. Peer reviewers should follow journals’ policies in situations they consider to represent a conflict.

If reviewers intentionally do not disclose any conflict of interest, they will be blacklisted for any future peer-reviewing activity of the journal.

The editorial office always ensures that an author, if added after the peer review activity of a manuscript, is not part of the reviewers’ list who have conducted a peer review of the same manuscript.

Editors must not review submitted manuscripts if they have any personal, professional or financial involvement/conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript. Every participant involved in the peer review process, including editorial board members, reviewers, and editors, must declare any potential conflicts of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review activity.

Editors-in-chief or editors who are responsible for the initial and final decision should abstain themselves from reviewing or taking decisions for any manuscript that is written by authors affiliated with the same institute as of editor, or if they have been a family member, competitor, collaborator, or have published any manuscript in the last three years with the authors associated with the manuscript. They can, however, nominate someone else on the board who could provide a neutral opinion on the manuscript.

The editorial office recommends that the editors follow COPE and WAME guidelines to process such manuscripts to which they are personally related.

Manuscript Submission by an Editor/Editor-in-Chief

The initial and final decision on the manuscripts submitted by an Editor/Editor-in-Chief will be taken by any other member of the board. The Editorial Office will identify members who do not have any potential conflict of interest with the Editor or Editor-in-Chief.

Anonymous images that do not identify the individual directly or indirectly, such as through any identifying marks or text, do not require formal consent, for example, X-rays, ultrasound images, pathology slides, or laparoscopic images.

In case consent is not obtained, concealing the identity through eye bars or blurring the face would not be acceptable.

For research involving animals, the authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the standards set forth in the eighth edition of the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals_prepub.pdf . published by the National Academy of Sciences, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.).

Research work on animals should be carried out in accordance with the NC3Rs ARRIVE Guidelines. For in vivo experiments, please visit https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines.

Authors should clearly state the name of the approval committee, highlighting that legal and ethical approvals were obtained prior to the initiation of the research work carried out on animals, and that the experiments were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations stated below:

• US authors should cite compliance with the US National Research Council's " Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals".
• The US Public Health Service's " Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" and " Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals".
• UK authors should conform to the UK legislation under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations (SI 2012/3039).
• European authors outside the UK should conform to Directive 2010/63/EU.
• Research on animals must adhere to the ethical guidelines of the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS).
• The manuscript must clearly include a declaration of compliance with relevant guidelines (e.g., the revised Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in the UK and Directive 2010/63/EU in Europe) and/or relevant permissions or licenses obtained by the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Ethics Approval Exemption:

If a study is exempted from ethics approval, authors must indicate the reasons for exemption in the ethical statement.

Following is an example of Ethical Statements:

"This study involving animal subjects is exempted from ethics approval for [specific reasons]. The exemption was evaluated and authorized by [Full name of ethics committee], ensuring adherence to ethical standards”.

Client-Owned Animals:

Client-owned animals (non-commercially available animals such as pets or livestock) should be studied exercising best practices in veterinary care. Authors must confirm that the owner(s) (or their legal representatives) have provided written consent for this purpose.

Following is an example of Ethical Statements regarding client-owned animals:

"The animal study was evaluated and authorized by [Full name of the ethics committee]. The owners provided written informed consent for their animals' involvement in this study, ensuring ethical treatment and compliance with standards."

International Standards and 3Rs Principle:

Studies involving animals must comply with internationally accepted standards and adhere to the 3Rs principles (Replace, Reduce, Refine).

• Replace: Replacing animals with alternatives whenever possible.
• Reduce: Reducing the number of animals used and
• Refine: Refining experimental settings, which can reduce animal damage.

Authors are encouraged to follow the ARRIVE guidelines (Reporting in Vivo Experiments) for reporting experiments involving live animals.

An example of Ethical Statements concerning international standards and the 3Rs Principle is as follows:

"This study adheres to internationally accepted standards for animal research, following the 3Rs principle. The ARRIVE guidelines were employed for reporting experiments involving live animals, promoting ethical research practices."

Euthanasia Protocols:

Studies on euthanasia, including chloral hydrate, ether, and chloroform overdose, are severely discouraged. Authors should include an in-depth description of any anesthetic, surgical, or euthanasia procedures conducted throughout the study.

If the experimental details explained in the study violate the standard animal research procedure, editors may seek extra documentation, such as approval forms and relevant literature citations.

We strive to promote gender and sex equity in research and adhere to the guidelines of Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) to ensure inclusivity and rigor of the work. All authors submitting research papers are required to follow the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines. These guidelines are intended to encourage the inclusion of sex and gender considerations in research in order to improve the accuracy and relevance of our publications.

Further, the SAGER guidelines for reporting sex and gender information in methodology or study design, data analysis, results, and interpretation of findings are strongly encouraged. Authors of review articles are advised to address the methods used for selecting, locating, extracting, and synthesizing data. Additionally, systematic reviews are also required to follow these guidelines.

• Author(s) and reviewers must be informed in case of misinterpretation or mishandling of acceptable International Standards.
• A strict notice should be sent to the author and reviewer to avoid future unethical misconduct.
• An editorial on the reported misconduct should be published, or an official notice of unethical behavior should be posted on the website.
• Official letters about this misconduct should be issued to the heads of departments, funding agencies of the accused author, the reviewer, and the abstracting and Indexing Agencies.
• Where required, retraction and withdrawal of publication may be undertaken from the publisher’s journal in discussion with the Head of the Department of the author or reviewer, and other higher authorities should be informed.
• The publisher may impose restrictions on future publications from the accused author in the journals for some period.

• [1]  G. Liu, K. Y. Lee, and H. F. Jordan, "TDM and TWDM de Bruijn networks and shufflenets for optical communications", IEEE Trans. Comp., vol. 46, pp. 695-701, June 1997.

• [2]  S. M. Hemmingsen, Soft Science. Saskatoon: University of Saskatchewan Press, 1997.
• [3]  A. Rezi and M. Allam, "Techniques in array processing by means of transformations,"in Control and Dynamic Systems, Vol. 69, Multidimensional Systems, C. T. Leondes, Ed. San Diego: Academic Press, 1995, pp. 133-180.

• [4]  D. Sarunyagate, Ed., Lasers. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996.

• [5]  N. Osifchin and G. Vau, “Power considerations for the modernization of telecommunications in Central and Eastern European and former Soviet Union (CCE/FSU) countries”, in Second International Telecommunication Energy Special Conference Special Conference, 1997, pp. 9-16.

• [6]  K. Kimura and A. Lipeles, "Fuzzy Controller Component," U. S. Patent 14,860,040, December 14, 1996.

• [7]  H. Zhang, "Delay-insensitive networks", M.S. thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, 1997.

Authors may deposit their datasets openly to Zenodo Repository, in addition to their own or their institutional archives.

Zenodo - a repository which is funded by the European Commission, CERN, and OpenAIRE—features a Data for Policy community.

Data for Zenodo site is primarily used to host Data for Policy for conference papers and posters. However, we also encourage authors who are already submitting to Data and Policy, to use Zenodo for presenting content associated with their articles.

Additionally, Zenodo can be used as a repository to host data and other materials that are referred to in the Data Availability Statement. These may include:

• datasets
• data management plans
• software documentation
• codes
• audio and video files
• proposals
• reports, and
• technical notes

Moreover, authors who wish to cite any relevant materials could use the unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) that Zenodo assigns to the uploaded content.

Authors may provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data and retain it for a reasonable time after publication.

Illustrations must be provided according to the following guidelines:

• Illustrations should be embedded in the text file and must be numbered consecutively in the order of their appearance. Each figure should include only a single illustration, which should be cropped to minimize the amount of space occupied by the illustration.
• If a figure is in separate parts, all parts of the figure must be provided in a single composite illustration file.
• Photographs should be provided with a scale bar, if appropriate, as well as high-resolution component files.
• All the numbers, symbols, and letters in figures should be consistent and clear throughout and large enough to remain readable when the size is reduced for publication.
• Each figure must be cited in the text in sequence.

Line art image type is normally an image based on lines and text. It does not contain tonal or shaded areas. The preferred file format should be TIFF or EPS, with the color mode being monochrome 1-bit or RGB, in a resolution of 900-1200 dpi.

Halftone image type is a continuous tone photograph containing no text. It should have the preferred file format, TIFF, with color mode being RGB or grayscale, in a resolution of 300 dpi.

Combination image type is an image containing halftone, text, or line art elements. It should have the preferred file format TIFF, with color mode being RGB or grayscale, in a resolution of 500-900 dpi.

Illustrations may be submitted in the following file formats:

• Illustrator
• EPS (preferred format for diagrams)
• PDF (also suitable for diagrams)
• PNG (preferred format for photos or images)
• Microsoft Word (version 5 and above; figures must be positioned on a single page)
• PowerPoint (figures must be positioned on a single page)
• TIFF
• JPEG (conversion should be done using the original file)
• BMP
• CDX (ChemDraw)
• TGF (ISISDraw)

Bentham Open does not process figures submitted in GIF format.

For TIFF or EPS figures with considerably large file sizes, restricting the file size in online submissions is advisable. Authors may, therefore, convert their files to the JPEG format before submission as this results in significantly reduced file size and uploading time while retaining the acceptable quality. JPEG is a lossy format. However, in order to maintain acceptable image quality, it is recommended that JPEG files be saved at high or maximum quality.

Zipit or Stuffit tools should not be used to compress files prior to submission as the resulting compression through these tools is always negligible.

The authors must refrain from supplying:

1. Graphics are embedded in a Word processor document (spreadsheet, presentation).
2. Files optimized for screen use (like GIF, BMP, PICT, and WPG) because of the low resolution.
3. Files with too low resolution.
4. Graphics that are disproportionately large for the content.

There are many software packages, most of them being either freeware or shareware, capable of converting to and from different graphics formats, including PNG.

General tools for image conversion include Graphic Converter on the Macintosh, Paint Shop Pro, for Windows, and ImageMagick, which are available on Macintosh, Windows and UNIX platforms.

Bitmap images (e.g. screenshots) should not be converted into EPS as they result in a much larger file size than the equivalent JPEG, TIFF, PNG, or BMP, and poor quality. EPS should only be used for images produced by vector-drawing applications such as Adobe Illustrator or CorelDraw. Most vector-drawing applications can be saved in or exported in, EPS format. If the images have been originally prepared in an MS Office application, such as Word or PowerPoint, original files should be directly uploaded to the site, instead of being converted to JPEG or another low quality format.

The structure drawing preferences must be according to the ACS style sheet, as follows:

Antimicrobial resistance represents a significant challenge to future healthcare provision. An acronym ESKAPEE has been derived from the names of the organisms recognised as the major threats although there are a number of other organisms, notably Neisseria gonorrhoeae, that have become equally challenging to treat in the clinic. These pathogens are characterised by the ability to rapidly develop and/or acquire resistance mechanisms in response to exposure to different antimicrobial agents. A key part of the armoury of these pathogens is a series of efflux pumps, which effectively exclude or reduce the intracellular concentration of a large number of antibiotics, making the pathogens significantly more resistant. These efflux pumps are the topic of considerable interest, both from the perspective of a basic understanding of efflux pump function, and its role in drug resistance, as well as the target for the development of novel adjunct therapies. The necessity to overcome antimicrobial resistance has encouraged investigations into the characterisation of resistance-modifying efflux pump inhibitors to block the mechanisms of drug extrusion, thereby restoring antibacterial susceptibility and returning existing antibiotics to the clinic. A greater understanding of drug recognition and transport by multidrug efflux pumps is needed to develop clinically useful inhibitors, given the breadth of molecules that can be effluxed by these systems. This review discusses different bacterial EPIs originating from both natural sources and chemical synthesis, and examines the challenges in designing successful EPIs that can be useful against multidrug-resistant bacteria.