Editorial Policies

Editorial Policies — Global Public Health Practice and Health Systems Journal (GPHHS)

Global Public Health Practice and Health Systems Journal (GPHHS) (EcoScribe Publishers) is committed to rigorous, ethical, and transparent publishing. These policies protect authors, reviewers, participants, and readers—while safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record.

In summary, we require: clear authorship, disclosure of funding and conflicts, ethical approval and consent where applicable, originality (no plagiarism), trustworthy data and analysis, and responsible reporting that supports public health practice and health systems improvement.

1. Editorial Integrity and Independence

GPHHS makes editorial decisions based solely on:

  • fit with journal scope,

  • scientific and methodological rigor,

  • ethical compliance,

  • clarity and completeness of reporting, and

  • contribution to public health practice and health systems strengthening.

Ability or willingness to pay APCs does not influence editorial or peer review decisions.

2. Conflicts of Interest (CoI) and Competing Interests

A conflict of interest may be financial, professional, institutional, political, or personal.

Authors must disclose all potential CoI at submission, including:

  • grants, employment, consultancies, honoraria,

  • stock ownership or financial relationships,

  • programme/policy roles related to the manuscript,

  • relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work.

Required manuscript statement:

  • “The authors declare no competing interests.” or a complete CoI disclosure.

Undisclosed CoI may lead to rejection, correction, or other editorial actions.

3. Funding, Support, and Role of the Sponsor

All sources of funding/support must be disclosed, including material or logistical support.

Authors should state:

  • funder name(s) and grant numbers (if applicable),

  • whether the funder influenced design, analysis, interpretation, or publication decisions.

For programme-embedded work (common in public health), authors must clearly describe:

  • the programme context, and

  • any role played by sponsors/implementing agencies.

4. Authorship, Contributions, and Acknowledgements

Authorship

Authorship should reflect meaningful intellectual contribution. GPHHS does not accept:

  • gift authorship (adding non-contributors),

  • ghost authorship (hiding contributors), or

  • undisclosed third-party writing/analysis support.

Acknowledgements

The acknowledgements should list contributors who do not meet authorship criteria (e.g., data collectors, field teams, translators, technical support). Authors must obtain permission from anyone named.

5. Data Access, Integrity, and Responsibility

For studies reporting original data, the corresponding author must confirm:

  • appropriate access to the data, and

  • responsibility for data integrity and accuracy of analyses.

When concerns arise, the editorial office may request:

  • de-identified data extracts,

  • analysis outputs/code,

  • ethics approval evidence, or

  • documentation supporting consent procedures.

6. Originality, Plagiarism, and Duplicate Publication

GPHHS strictly prohibits:

  • plagiarism (copying without attribution),

  • close paraphrasing without citation,

  • self-plagiarism / duplicate publication,

  • inappropriate “salami slicing” of one study into multiple papers.

Submissions may be screened using similarity checking tools. Manuscripts with unacceptable similarity may be rejected or returned for correction.

7. Ethics Approval, Consent, and Protection of Participants

GPHHS prioritizes ethical conduct, particularly where research involves vulnerable populations (e.g., children, refugees, displaced persons, stigmatized groups).

Ethics approval

All research involving humans, identifiable personal data, or animals must include:

  • name of the ethics committee/IRB,

  • approval/reference number, and

  • consent process details (or justified exemption).

For routine programme or HMIS data, authors must clarify:

  • ethical clearance or administrative permission,

  • legal/ethical basis for using the data, and

  • safeguards to protect confidentiality.

Informed consent and privacy

Authors must:

  • protect confidentiality and remove identifiers where possible,

  • avoid indirect identification through detailed case descriptions,

  • obtain explicit consent for publishing identifiable information.

If photographs or identifiable images are used, explicit publication consent is required. Masking eyes alone is not sufficient.

Vulnerable populations

For minors or individuals unable to consent:

  • obtain guardian consent and participant assent where appropriate,

  • ensure voluntary participation without coercion.

A clear ethics and consent statement must appear in the manuscript.

8. Human and Animal Rights

Research must comply with relevant national laws and international standards (e.g., Declaration of Helsinki for human research). Animal studies must report compliance with institutional/national animal care standards.

9. Clinical Trials and Prospective Intervention Studies

Where applicable, clinical trials and prospective intervention studies should be:

  • registered in a publicly accessible registry before recruitment, and

  • include the registration number in the manuscript.

Major deviations from protocol should be reported and explained.

10. Data Sharing and Transparency

GPHHS encourages responsible data sharing where ethical and feasible.

Authors should include a Data Availability Statement indicating:

  • whether data are available,

  • how they can be accessed, and

  • any restrictions (e.g., confidentiality, legal constraints, consent limitations).

For sensitive datasets, authors should describe access governance and safeguards rather than open release.

11. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

GPHHS follows best practices for post-publication updates:

  • Corrections: for honest errors that do not invalidate the findings.

  • Retractions: for major errors, plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, or misconduct.

  • Expressions of Concern: for serious unresolved concerns under investigation.

Our priority is to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

12. Peer Review Quality Controls

Submissions undergo:

  • editorial screening (scope, quality, ethics, completeness), and

  • peer review (typically double-blind) with at least two expert reviewers where feasible.

We value work that:

  • reports methods transparently,

  • interprets results responsibly, and

  • provides actionable learning for systems and practice.

13. Transparency and Best Practice Commitments

GPHHS aims to maintain clear, accessible policies on:

  • editorial processes and governance,

  • peer review procedures,

  • APCs and author rights,

  • ethics and misconduct handling,

  • complaints and appeals.

These policies strengthen trust for authors, reviewers, librarians, and indexing services.