The editorial team of Global Insights in Public and Preventive Health (GIPPH) is responsible for maintaining fairness, transparency, and high academic standards throughout the publication process. All editorial decisions are based solely on scientific quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

These responsibilities apply to the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editors, and Editorial Board Members.

1. Fair and Objective Decision-Making

Editors evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Scientific quality and originality
• Clarity, accuracy, and methodological rigor
• Relevance to public health and preventive medicine
• Importance and contribution to the research and policy community

Editorial decisions are made without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.

2. Confidentiality

Editors must:

• Treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents
• Share manuscripts only with individuals directly involved in the editorial and peer-review process
• Not use unpublished information or data for personal, academic, or professional advantage

3. Peer Review Management

Editors are responsible for:

• Selecting qualified, independent, and unbiased reviewers
• Ensuring adherence to the single-blind peer review process
• Monitoring the quality, fairness, and timeliness of reviews
• Making editorial decisions based on reviewer feedback and scientific merit

If reviewer opinions conflict significantly, additional reviewers may be invited.

4. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must remain independent of:

• Publisher influence
• Financial considerations
• Institutional, political, or commercial pressures

Editors are required to safeguard the journal’s editorial neutrality and academic independence at all times.

5. Conflicts of Interest

Editors must:

• Declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest
• Refrain from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists
• Avoid appointing reviewers with competing or conflicting interests

All conflicts of interest are managed transparently and ethically.

6. Ethical Oversight

Editors ensure that:

• Research complies with ethical standards for human and animal studies
• Required ethical approvals, informed consent, and permissions are provided
• Allegations of misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication) are addressed promptly and responsibly

GIPPH follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines when handling ethical concerns and disputes.

7. Clear and Professional Communication

Editors must:

• Communicate editorial decisions clearly, respectfully, and in a timely manner
• Provide constructive and informative feedback to authors
• Clearly explain the reasons for acceptance, revision, or rejection
• Maintain professionalism in all editorial correspondence

8. Integrity of the Published Record

Editors are responsible for:

• Maintaining the accuracy, quality, and reliability of published content
• Issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when necessary
• Ensuring proper archiving, metadata accuracy, and version control

9. Continuous Improvement

Editors are encouraged to:

• Stay informed about developments in scholarly publishing standards
• Participate in editorial training and peer-review best practices
• Promote ethical research conduct, responsible authorship, and transparency

10. Responsibilities Toward Authors and Reviewers

Editors ensure that:

• Reviewers are treated with respect and professionalism
• Authors receive fair, unbiased, and timely evaluations
• The editorial and peer-review process remains efficient, transparent, and respectful

GIPPH is committed to fostering a professional, ethical, and supportive publishing environment for all contributors.