Editor Guidelines

Editors of the Journal of Applied Health Sciences and Medicine (JAHSM) are responsible for maintaining a fair, independent, confidential, transparent, and ethical editorial process.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance to the journal's scope, ethical compliance, and appropriate peer-review evidence.

Decisions must not be improperly influenced by nationality, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, political views, personal relationships, commercial interests, financial considerations, advertisers, sponsors, or other irrelevant external interests.

Editor-in-Chief Responsibility

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for the journal's editorial direction, peer-review integrity, publication ethics, and final editorial decisions.

The Editor-in-Chief may delegate manuscript handling, peer-review management, and decision-making to a qualified Senior Editor, Associate Editor, or other formally designated editor with appropriate subject expertise.

Such delegation does not remove the Editor-in-Chief's overall responsibility for the journal's editorial and publication-ethics standards.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Editors should assess whether a manuscript:

• Falls within the journal's aims and scope;
• Contains sufficient scholarly and scientific content;
• Meets applicable research-ethics requirements;
• Provides appropriate ethical statements where required;
• Is suitable for external peer review; and
• Raises apparent research-integrity or conflict-of-interest concerns.

Manuscripts that are clearly unsuitable for the journal or do not meet basic editorial or ethical requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

Peer Review

JAHSM uses a single-blind peer-review process. Reviewers remain anonymous to authors. Primary research articles are subject to external peer review as appropriate to the article type.

Editors should select reviewers with appropriate subject expertise and independence and should consider reviewer conflicts of interest.

Where external peer review is required, the journal normally seeks assessment from at least two independent reviewers. Reviewer recommendations are advisory and do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

Editorial Decisions

Editors may decide:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or by a Senior Editor, Associate Editor, or other formally designated editor acting under authority delegated by the Editor-in-Chief.

Research Ethics Oversight

Editors should ensure that manuscripts involving human participants, animals, clinical trials, identifiable patient information, medical records, human biological materials, or other ethically regulated research contain appropriate ethical statements and supporting information where required.

Editors may request ethics-approval documentation, consent documentation, clinical-trial registration information, institutional permissions, or other supporting information where necessary.

Clinical Trial Registration

Editors should consider whether applicable clinical trials have been registered in an appropriate publicly accessible registry and whether registration information is reported consistently in the manuscript.

The journal follows relevant ICMJE clinical trial registration recommendations.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

An editor should not handle a manuscript where a relationship or interest could compromise or reasonably appear to compromise impartiality. Where necessary, the manuscript should be reassigned to another qualified editor.

Research and Publication Misconduct

Editors should investigate credible concerns involving:

• Plagiarism or inappropriate text reuse;
• Duplicate or redundant publication;
• Fabrication or falsification;
• Inappropriate image manipulation;
• Unethical research practices;
• Falsified or inappropriate ethics approvals;
• Improper authorship practices;
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest;
• Peer-review manipulation; or
• Other conduct that may compromise the integrity of the scholarly record.

Editors may request supporting information or documentation from authors, reviewers, institutions, ethics committees, or other appropriate parties. Where appropriate, editors should cooperate with relevant institutions in research-integrity investigations.

Reporting Standards

Editors should encourage appropriate reporting standards according to study design, including:

• CONSORT – randomized trials
• STROBE – observational studies
• PRISMA – systematic reviews and meta-analyses
• CARE – case reports
• STARD – diagnostic accuracy studies
• ARRIVE – animal research
• COREQ / SRQR – qualitative research
• EQUATOR Network – additional reporting standards

Confidentiality

Editors must maintain confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts, unpublished research data, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, patient information, and other information obtained during manuscript handling.

Unpublished information obtained through editorial handling must not be used for personal, professional, academic, financial, or competitive advantage without appropriate authorization.

Artificial Intelligence

Editors must not upload confidential manuscript content, unpublished data, patient information, reviewer reports, or other protected editorial material into AI systems where confidentiality or intellectual property cannot be assured.

Any use of AI in editorial or production processes must be transparent and must not compromise confidentiality, accuracy, authors' rights, or editorial independence.

The journal follows the principles of the ICMJE Recommendations on AI in Publishing.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The journal may publish corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other appropriate notices when necessary to protect the integrity of the published scholarly record.

A correction may be issued when an error affects the accuracy or clarity of a published article without invalidating the overall scholarly record. Retraction may be considered where reliable evidence indicates that published work is substantially unreliable, involves serious research or publication misconduct, contains serious ethical violations, or otherwise materially compromises the scholarly record.

Complaints and Appeals

Editors should provide a fair process for handling legitimate complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, publication processes, or journal management.

Appeals should provide clear reasons and relevant supporting information and should be considered according to the journal's editorial procedures and publication-ethics principles.

Publication Ethics Framework

JAHSM's editorial policies are informed by recognized medical and scholarly publication standards, including:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) – Core Practices
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) – Recommendations
• World Medical Association – Declaration of Helsinki (2024)
• EQUATOR Network – Health Research Reporting Guidelines