Peer Review Policy
Global Insights in Public and Preventive Health (GIPPH)
The Global Insights in Public and Preventive Health (GIPPH) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific integrity, quality, and transparency. All manuscripts submitted to GIPPH undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure relevance, originality, and scientific validity.
1. Type of Peer Review
JCAM uses a Single-Blind Peer Review system:
- Reviewer anonymity is maintained.
- Authors’ names and affiliations are visible to reviewers.
- Reviewers evaluate manuscripts objectively without influence from author identity.
Optional Fast-Track Review (15 days) is available upon author request with an additional fee.
2. Peer Review Process: Step by Step
Step 1: Initial Submission
- Authors submit manuscripts through the GIPPH online submission system.
- All required files, including manuscript, figures, tables, and supplementary data, must be uploaded.
Step 2: Initial Screening by Editorial Office
- The Managing Editor or editorial staff screens the submission for:
- Completeness
- Adherence to Author Guidelines
- Plagiarism check (similarity index)
- Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be returned without review.
Step 3: Editor Assignment
- The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to a relevant Associate Editor based on subject area.
- Associate Editor conducts a preliminary evaluation for scope, novelty, and scientific quality.
Step 4: Reviewer Assignment
- The manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the field.
- Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for:
- Originality and significance
- Methodological rigor
- Data accuracy and interpretation
- Ethical compliance
- Clarity of writing
Step 5: Review Evaluation
- Reviewers submit detailed comments and recommendations:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
- The Associate Editor evaluates reviewer comments and recommends a decision to the Editor-in-Chief.
Step 6: Editorial Decision
- The Editor-in-Chief communicates the decision to the authors:
- Accept as is
- Revise and resubmit
- Reject
Step 7: Author Revisions
- Authors revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments and submit the revised version.
- Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers for second evaluation, if required.
Step 8: Formatting and Copyediting
- Accepted manuscripts undergo professional copyediting and formatting according to journal style.
- Figures, tables, and references are verified for accuracy.
Step 9: Final Editor Approval
- The Editor-in-Chief reviews the final formatted manuscript to ensure all revisions and comments are addressed.
Step 10: Author Proofing
- Authors receive galley proofs for final approval.
- Authors must review and approve proofs, ensuring accuracy of content, tables, figures, and references.
Step 11: Author Signature & APC Invoice
- Authors sign a copyright agreement, confirming shared copyright with the publisher.
- Authors receive the Article Processing Charge (APC) invoice and payment instructions.
Step 12: Final Publication
- After author approval and APC payment, the manuscript is published online as the final version.
- The article is assigned DOI (if available) and indexed according to journal policies.
- The publication is immediately accessible under Open Access (CC BY 4.0 license).
3. Ethical Standards in Peer Review
- All reviewers are required to declare conflicts of interest.
- Confidentiality of manuscripts is strictly maintained.
- Manuscripts are evaluated based solely on scientific merit, without discrimination.
- Any suspected misconduct, plagiarism, or ethical violations are reported to the Editor-in-Chief and handled according to COPE guidelines.
4. Timeline
- Standard peer review process: 30 days from submission to final decision.
- Fast-track peer review: 15 days (additional fee applies).
5. Contact
For queries regarding the peer review process, authors may contact: editor@globalpublichealthjournal.com