Decision-Making Process

ACADEMIA Health Sphere Journal (AHSJ)
https://academia.edu.pk/index.php/hsj

At ACADEMIA Health Sphere Journal (AHSJ), we follow a rigorous, ethical, and transparent editorial workflow to ensure the publication of high-quality, peer-reviewed research in the domains of health sciences, medicine, and public health. Each manuscript undergoes a structured evaluation process focusing on originality, scientific merit, ethical compliance, and alignment with the journal’s scope.

1. Initial Submission Screening

Preliminary Editorial Check
Upon submission, the editorial team performs a technical review to confirm:

Adherence to AHSJ formatting guidelines (title page, abstract, references, tables/figures)
Inclusion of all required declarations (authorship, funding, conflicts of interest, ethical approval)
Acceptable similarity index using Turnitin or equivalent software

⚠️ Manuscripts exceeding a 15% similarity index may be returned for revision or rejected.

Scope and Relevance Review
The Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor evaluates whether the manuscript fits within the journal’s thematic focus (e.g., clinical research, public health, epidemiology) and contributes novel insights. Out-of-scope submissions may be desk-rejected without external review.

2. Peer Review Process

Reviewer Assignment
Submissions that pass the initial review are assigned to at least two expert reviewers under AHSJ’s double-blind peer review model, keeping both author and reviewer identities confidential.

Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess each manuscript on:

Originality and clinical/public health relevance
Clarity of research objectives and hypotheses
Validity and rigor of research methodology
Ethical compliance and transparency in data reporting
Quality of literature review and context setting
Organization, writing clarity, and overall coherence

Reviewer Recommendations
Each reviewer submits one of the following decisions:

✅ Accept as is
✏️ Minor Revisions
???? Major Revisions
❌ Reject

3. Editorial Evaluation and Final Decision

Review Consolidation
The Section Editor consolidates the reviewer feedback and evaluates the manuscript’s suitability. In case of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer or the editorial board may be consulted.

Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final determination:

Accept
Minor Revisions
Major Revisions
Reject

Authors are notified via formal email, along with anonymized reviewer comments and revision instructions, if applicable.

4. Revisions and Resubmission

Minor Revisions
Authors are typically given 2–3 weeks to revise and resubmit. Revisions are reviewed by the handling editor.

Major Revisions
Authors may be granted 4–6 weeks for significant revisions. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for re-evaluation.

Resubmission After Rejection
Generally, rejected manuscripts are not reconsidered. However, if the editorial board identifies substantial potential, a new submission may be invited at the editor’s discretion.

5. Communication and Appeals

Decision Notification
Authors receive a decision letter that includes:

Editorial outcome
Reviewer feedback
Formatting or compliance requirements (for accepted manuscripts)

Appeals Process
Authors may appeal a decision by submitting a detailed justification. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editorial committee. Appeal decisions are final.

6. Post-Acceptance Workflow

Final Submission Package
Upon acceptance, authors must submit:

Final, clean version of the manuscript
Author biographies and affiliations
High-quality figures and tables
Signed copyright and licensing forms

Copyediting and Proof Approval
Manuscripts undergo professional copyediting. Authors are provided with proofs for final review and approval before publication.

Online Publication
Accepted articles are published in the upcoming issue of AHSJ and made open access under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, which permits non-commercial use with proper attribution.

7. Ethical Oversight

Conflict of Interest Disclosure
All authors, reviewers, and editors must declare any potential conflicts that may influence objectivity.

Research Ethics Compliance
Studies involving human or animal subjects must include IRB/ethical approval and informed consent. Submissions lacking appropriate documentation may be rejected.

Data Integrity and Transparency
AHSJ is committed to research integrity. Any suspected data manipulation or ethical breach will be thoroughly investigated and may lead to correction, retraction, or institutional notification.

This structured editorial framework reflects AHSJ’s dedication to publishing research that is ethically sound, scientifically rigorous, and clinically relevant, thereby advancing global health knowledge and practices.