Focus and Scope

APALM is a specialized journal in the field of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine which, inter alia, includes Histopathology, Cytology, Hematology, Clinical Pathology, Forensic Pathology, Blood Banking, Clinical Bio-Chemistry and Medical Microbiology (Bacteriology, Virology, Mycology, Parasitology), etc.

APALM is included in many leading Indexing and Abstracting Databases and by maintaining high publication standards aims to be indexed in PubMed Central (PMC) Database.

APALM is the top ranking Indian Journal in field of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, with the highest IC Value amongst the Indian Journals in the field of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine that are indexed with Index Copernicus.

Peer Review Process

Peer review process is double-blinded i.e. the author is anonymous to the reviewer and the reviewer is anonymous to the author as well. All submissions to journal are assessed by an Editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review with appropriate independent experts. Reviewers’ name will not be revealed to the authors. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript.

The typical review will take minimum 8 weeks. However, this may take little longer due to unseen workloads.

All comments received from the reviewers will be passed on to the authors within one week after getting back from the reviewers. 

When the article is received from peer reviewer there will be one of the following outcome and the decision choices include:

  • Accept Submission: The submission will be accepted without revisions.
  • Revisions Required: The submission will be accepted after minor changes have been made according to the reviewer's comment.
  • Resubmit for Review: The submission needs to be re-worked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. It will require a second round of review, however.
  • Resubmit elsewhere: When the submission do not meet the focus and scope of APALM.
  • Decline Submission: The submission will not be published with the journal.

Publication Frequency

Monthly (Twelve issues per month) since 2018

Bi-monthly (Six issues per year) in 2017

Quarterly (Four issues per year) from 2014 to 2016


Open Access Policy

APALM is an Open Access Journal without any subscription module. Open Access is a publishing model that provides immediate, worldwide, barrier-free access to the full text of research articles without requiring a subscription to the journal in which these articles are published.

In this model, the publication costs are usually covered by the authors themselves, author’s institution or research funds. These Open Access charges replace subscription charges and allow the publishers to make the published material freely available to all interested online readers. All of PaGe journals are open access online journals allowing universal access, maximum visibility and free dissemination of published work.

Salient Features

  • International, Double-blind peer-reviewed, Indexed journal 
  • Both online and print journal. 
  • Open Access Journal (increase visibility, usage and more citations for your research)
  • High Impact factor (2.8952)
  • High IC value (74.20):  APALM is the top ranking Indian Journal in field of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, with the highest IC Value (74.20) amongst the Indian Journals in the field of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine that are indexed with Index Copernicus.
  • FAST Track Review service* on request
  • Publishes original, peer-reviewed articles for pathologists.Microbiologists, Biochemists and clinical laboratory scientists
  • Primary objective is to stimulate and facilitate research publications
  • User friendly, open access portal with an ease of navigation and easy online submission and tracking of manuscripts.
  • MCI approved journal

Article processing charges (APC)

Article processing charges (APC):

APC are required to meet operations expenses. Being an Open Access Publisher, APALM does not receive payment for subscription as its journals are freely accessible over the internet. The author, institution or funding agency pays a modest fee to help cover the actual cost of the essential final step, the publication. This charge covers the entire cost of the publication process, which includes peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, maintaining, online hosting and archiving, and allows immediate access to the full text versions of the research articles. However, the APC is payable only if the article gets accepted for publishing.

APALM does not charge article submission fee, color printing charge from the authors. 

We strongly encourage “Online” publication model to minimize the additional carbon footprints resulting from printing on papers. But we also understand that ‘Hard (print) Copy’ of journal is required by some authors, students and institutions. Therefore, we distribute hard copy of journals to authors and institutions (subscribers) as per demand raised by them.

However, the cost of the Hard Copy of the Journal is NOT INCLUDED in the Article Processing Charges (APC) and to order the print copy of the Journal, payment has to be made separately.

APC (Effective from 01 January 2017):

     a.     For articles from within India:

          Post Acceptance APC: Rs 4000/- for each article

     b.     For articles from outside India:

          Post Acceptance APC: USD 160/- for each article

Note: Any request for change in the article (excluding typographical errors or any unforeseen omissions on our part) after acceptance shall be chargeable.

Payments Gateway:


Conflict-of-Interest Statement

All efforts are being made to abide by the regulations as specified by 'International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' through "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals".

Accordingly, at APALM, No conflict of interest exists between the Authors (or the Authors’ Institution), Reviewers or Editors through any Financial relationship, Personal relationship, Academic competition and Intellectual passion, etc. that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions. Thus there is no potential to influence or affect his or her scientific judgment.

Advertising Policy

If you wish to advertise on the journal website, please write to us for details of charges and other conditions at

APALM editorial content and decisions are independent and will not be influenced by sponsorships or advertisements.

Advertisements are allowed only on the sides panel of the website pages. These are not tagged or linked to any particular manuscript. No advertisements is allowed within or immediately following an article. No manuscript specific advertisements are accepted.

We accept advertisements from google and other advertising companies.

Statement of Informed Consent

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that a patient who is identifiable be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should identify Individuals who provide writing assistance and disclose the funding source for this assistance.

For more information, please see detailed Author Guidelines at

Statement of Human and Animal Rights

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

For more information, please see detailed Author Guidelines at

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

This Journal endorses the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

In addition, it is expected of authors, reviewers and editors that they follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behaviour contained therein.

A selection of important points is included below, but one should always refer to the documents listed above (Available at their respective websites) for full details.

Duties of Editors

Fair play and editorial independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Co-Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content. 


Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript. Also please refer to Statement of Conflict of Interest at

Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Co-Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Co-Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour.


Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.


Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Co-Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation. For more information, please refer to Author Guidelines at

Also please refer to Statement of Conflict of Interest at

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Please visit for more information on this issue.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. For more information, please refer to Author Guidelines at

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any). For more information, please refer to Author Guidelines at

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services. For more information, please refer to Author Guidelines at

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed. For more information on Statement of Human and Animal Rights, please visit  

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions required", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper. For guidelines on retracting or correcting articles, please click at

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.  The publisher shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. For guidelines on Article Withdrawal, Removal and Replacement policy, please click at

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by assigning DOI to individual article.



Sources of Support


Journal History

Volume 2, Number 3 (2015):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 2, Number 4 (2015):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 1 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 2 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 3 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 4 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 5 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 3, Number 6 (2016):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 1 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 2 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 3 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 4 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 5 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)


Volume 4, Number 6 (2017):

(Please Double Click to enlarge the Text)