THE EDITORIAL PROCESS
NHJ follows the principles of COPE, WAME, ICJME, DOAJ, OASPA guidelines. Submitted manuscripts are duly acknowledged and initially reviewed for originality, significance, adequacy of documentation, reader interest and composition. Submitted manuscripts should not be published, simultaneously submitted or accepted for publication elsewhere.
Rejection: The preliminary rejection of the manuscript is related to; manuscript being out of scope, manuscript not formatted correctly, not following checklist and guidelines accurately, submission below publishable standards, incomplete submission (e.g. lack of ethical approval letter for research article). We request the author to go through the author guidelines in detail to avoid rejection. We hope that the rejection of current submission will not deter the author to continue submitting manuscripts to the NHJ.
Because of any reasons, if the author do not receive any information or update about submission within 2-4 weeks, please contact NHJ as soon as possible through email. We will make sure that your voice is heard and addressed appropriately.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
The Chief Editor, together with the editorial board will ensure the double-blind peer review policy. The manuscript will be blinded when sending out for review. The author is anonymous to the reviewer and the reviewer is anonymous to the author as well. The editors will be responsible for directing the manuscripts to the appropriate reviewers who have the knowledge and/or expertise in the requisite fields. Peer Reviewers will be provided with Review Guidelines, once they accept to review the submission. In rare, controversial and special circumstances, papers that require revision as suggested by the reviewer will be sent back to that same reviewer for him/her to evaluate the manuscript once again after revised re-submission from the author. In the case of a controversial groundbreaking article that could have a far-reaching impact on the field, further reviews may be sought.
The typical review will take minimum 6-8 weeks which includes 4 weeks for peer review and remaining weeks for peer review handling process. However, this may take a little longer depending upon reviewer’s response. The final decision on whether to accept or reject the article is taken by the Editor-in-Chief based on editorial board and peer reviewers. The rejection could also be due to peer reviewers' comment not adequately answered or unanswered, plagiarism, publication misconduct and more.
The contributors are informed about the rejection/acceptance of the manuscript with the peer reviewer’s comments. Accepted articles have to be resubmitted after making the necessary changes or clarifying questions made during the peer review process. All comments received from the reviewers will be passed on to the authors within 1-2 weeks after getting back from the reviewers. NHJ respect the views, opinion, comments and decision of the reviewer. However, the right for acceptance and rejection of the manuscript is reserved with the Chief Editor, on the basis of maintaining the integrity of the science, following the guideline of ICJME, WAME and COPE. The accepted articles are edited for grammatical, punctuation, print style and format errors and page proofs and are sent to the corresponding author who should return them within three days. Non-response to galley proof may result in the delay of publication or even rejection of the article.