Peer Review Process

EJNHC ' Peer-reviewing process will be conducted through electronic and printed documentations versions including the following phases:

1. Submission of Paper: The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal. This is usually via a website, as the journal is using a double-blind option in reviewing.

2. Editorial Office Assessment: The journal Editor-in-Chief (EIC) will check the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC): The EIC checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

4. EIC Assigns an Associate Editor (AE): Our journals have Associate Editors who will handle the peer review according to specialty, scientific scope & nature of the research. If they do, they would be assigned at this stage.

5. Invitation to Reviewers: The (EIC) & Editorial board will select & send invitations to Two reviewers -  out of the professional reviewer board of the journal - based on research specialty. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained.

6. Response to Invitations: If selected reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.

7. The review is Conducted: The reviewer is requested to handle their comment within 2 weeks of receiving the research paper to the Journal (EIC or EA). Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review guided by the structured manuscript review provided. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

8. Journal Evaluates the Reviews: The (EA) considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

9. The Decision is Communicated: The (EIC) sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments.

10. Next Steps: - If accepted, the paper is sent to production. – If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the (AE) should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article.

- At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. - If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the (AE) editor.

- All reviewers are given recognition through a thank you letter appreciating their cooperation & enriching the journal value in achieving EJNHS aim

Review Confidentiality Policy

EJNHS Editorial board is committed to ensuring integrity in the peer review process. Accordingly, we expect all peer reviewers to comply with COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers,  after sending it to them. Including respecting the confidentiality of peer review and not revealing any details of a manuscript or communications related to it, during or after the peer review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.

References:

-Modified from:https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-review/the-peer-review-process.html_   January 20, 2020

-https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/tools-and-resources/review-confidentiality-policy.html  January 20, 2020  

-Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and BestPractice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_ January 20, 2020.