Peer Review Policy
Overview
UJHSE employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts. This policy is designed to ensure the quality, validity, and integrity of published research in accordance with COPE guidelines and ICMJE recommendations.
Review Model
Double-blind — both author and reviewer identities are concealed throughout the review process.
Initial Screening
All submissions first undergo editorial screening for:
- Scope and relevance to UJHSE
- Adherence to author guidelines and formatting
- Completeness of required documents
- Plagiarism check (iThenticate, similarity <15%)
- Basic scientific quality and ethical compliance
Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be desk-rejected within 5 working days.
Reviewer Selection
The editor assigns a minimum of 2 independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on:
- Subject expertise
- Publication record
- Absence of conflicts of interest
- Geographic and institutional diversity
- Previous review quality and timeliness
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on the following criteria:
- Scientific merit and originality
- Appropriateness of study design and methodology
- Validity and reliability of results
- Quality of data analysis and interpretation
- Adherence to reporting guidelines
- Clarity of writing
- Relevance to journal scope
- Ethical compliance
Review Timeline
| Initial screening | 5 working days |
| Reviewer invitation response | 3 days |
| Review completion | 21 days |
| Editorial decision | 4–6 weeks from submission |
| Author revision (minor) | 30 days |
| Author revision (major) | 60 days |
Decision Types
- Accept without revision
- Accept with minor revisions
- Major revisions required (re-review)
- Reject with option to resubmit
- Reject
Revision Process
Authors must submit a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to original reviewers. A second round of revision may be requested if needed.
Appeals
Authors who believe their manuscript was rejected in error may submit a written appeal to editor@ujhse.utkarshresearchnetwork.in within 21 days of the decision. An appeal must include:
- The manuscript ID and original decision letter
- A point-by-point response to each reviewer/editor concern explaining why the decision should be reconsidered
- Any new evidence or analysis supporting the appeal
Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief (or, if the EiC handled the original decision, by an independent Associate Editor). The EiC may consult new reviewers. Outcomes are: appeal upheld (manuscript re-enters review), partially upheld (specific revisions invited), or appeal denied. Appeal decisions are final. We aim to respond to appeals within 30 days.
Conflicts of Interest & Recusal
Editors and reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest (COI) and recuse themselves where any of the following exist:
- Co-authorship with the author(s) within the last 5 years
- Current or recent collaboration, supervision (PhD/postdoc), or grant co-investigator relationship
- Same institution / department
- Personal, family, financial, or competitive interest in the work
Where a recusal is needed, the editor reassigns the manuscript to another handling editor and the case is logged.
Reviewer Recognition
UJHSE values the work of peer reviewers and recognises their contribution through:
- An annual reviewer acknowledgement published on the journal website
- A certificate of review for each completed review, suitable for inclusion in academic dossiers
- Optional verification on Web of Science Researcher / Publons (formerly ORCID Reviewer Recognition) — reviewers can claim their reviews with a single click
- Priority consideration for invited Editorial Board positions
Transparency & Open Peer Review (Optional)
While the default model at UJHSE is double-blind, authors may opt-in at submission to transparent peer review, in which the (anonymised) reviewer reports and author responses are published alongside the article as supplementary material. Reviewer identities remain anonymous unless the reviewer chooses to be named.
Registered Reports
UJHSE accepts Registered Reports for prospective studies (especially RCTs and pre-registered observational studies). In this format, the study protocol is peer-reviewed before data collection; if accepted in principle (Stage 1), publication of the final article (Stage 2) is guaranteed regardless of the direction of results, provided protocol fidelity is maintained.
Post-Publication Review
Readers may submit comments, corrections, or expressions of concern about published articles via Letters to the Editor or by writing to editor@ujhse.utkarshresearchnetwork.in. Substantive concerns trigger a formal investigation in line with COPE flowcharts and may result in a Correction, Expression of Concern, or Retraction.
Plagiarism Screening
Every manuscript is screened with iThenticate / Turnitin at initial submission and again before acceptance. The acceptable similarity threshold is <15% overall with no single source >5% (excluding references and direct quotations). Manuscripts with concerning patterns are referred to the Editor-in-Chief and handled per the COPE plagiarism flowchart.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the manuscript or its data for any purpose other than peer review. Reviewers must not use AI / LLM tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) to assist with their review unless the journal has authorised it in writing, because uploading manuscript text to such systems breaches confidentiality. Review reports are confidential among editors, reviewers, and authors.
Editor & Editorial Board Submissions
Manuscripts authored by Editorial Board members or the Editor-in-Chief are handled by an independent Associate Editor outside the author's chain of supervision. The author has no access to reviewer identities, decision history, or manuscript metadata. This is logged for transparency.
Ethical Standards
UJHSE peer review is aligned with: