Publication Policies

Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR)

ISSN: 3007-2948

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

A High-Impact Platform for Advancing Evidence-Based Healthcare Research

The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal dedicated to advancing scientific knowledge and clinical practice across the vast landscape of health, rehabilitation, and allied sciences. Established with a commitment to scientific rigor, editorial excellence, research integrity, and global accessibility, IJHR serves as a trusted platform for researchers, clinicians, educators, and policymakers seeking to disseminate high-quality evidence that shapes modern healthcare delivery.

IJHR publishes cutting-edge research that advances understanding in clinical sciences, rehabilitation interventions, applied health sciences, preventive medicine, multidisciplinary healthcare, and emerging technologies. By integrating rigorous peer review, transparent editorial practices, and strong ethical foundations, the journal ensures that each published article contributes meaningfully to the global body of scientific knowledge.

IJHR is published by Health and Research Insights, a Pakistan-based academic publisher committed to supporting sustainable, ethical, and equitable dissemination of scholarly work. The journal operates under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, allowing widespread dissemination while preserving the originality and integrity of published works.

Commitment to Global Standards

In alignment with international scholarly publishing norms, IJHR adheres to guidelines and principles established by:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
  • World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
  • Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Principles of Best Practice
  • Crossref Membership Standards
  • FAIR Data Principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable)

These affiliations and standards reflect the journal’s commitment to transparency, accountability, reproducibility, and responsible open-access publishing.

Editorial Mission

IJHR seeks to bridge gaps between scientific evidence, clinical practice, policy formulation, and community health needs. The journal prioritizes research that:

  • Improves patient outcomes, functional independence, and quality of life.
  • Strengthens multidisciplinary rehabilitation practices across the lifespan.
  • Promotes evidence-based decision-making in clinical and community settings.
  • Facilitates knowledge translation from research to practice.
  • Encourages ethical, responsible, and equitable research conduct.

As a global platform, IJHR welcomes submissions from all regions of the world, embracing cultural, methodological, and disciplinary diversity.

Editorial Structure and Scholarly Governance

The journal is supported by a highly qualified Editorial Board, comprising experts in health sciences, rehabilitation, medical education, clinical research, public health, pharmaceutical sciences, and biomedical technology. Editorial functions follow a structured hierarchy involving:

  • Editor-in-Chief
  • Managing Editor
  • Section Editors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Peer Reviewers with content-specific expertise

Each role is governed by clearly defined criteria and responsibilities to ensure objectivity, scholarly stewardship, and editorial transparency.

Publication Model

IJHR is fully open access, ensuring that all published content is freely available to readers worldwide without subscription barriers. This model supports global dissemination of health research, especially benefiting:

  • Researchers in low-resource settings
  • Healthcare professionals seeking updated evidence
  • Students and trainees in academic programs
  • Policymakers and institutions shaping health systems
  • Caregivers, advocacy groups, and community organizations

By removing paywalls, IJHR advocates for equitable knowledge access, contributing to improved healthcare outcomes and strengthening research ecosystems globally.

 

AIMS AND SCOPE

Aims

The primary aims of IJHR are to:

  1. Advance Evidence-Based Research
    Publish high-quality, peer-reviewed scientific work that pushes boundaries in rehabilitation, allied health, medical sciences, prevention, and health technology.
  2. Promote Multidisciplinary Collaboration
    Bring together diverse health professionals—including physicians, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, pharmacists, speech-language pathologists, dieticians, biomedical scientists, psychologists, nurses, and public health experts—to foster research synergy.
  3. Strengthen Clinical Practice and Healthcare Delivery
    Support translational research that directly contributes to improving patient care, functional outcomes, and community health.
  4. Support Innovation and Emerging Fields
    Encourage publications on modern healthcare technologies, genomic medicine, artificial intelligence, digital rehabilitation, telehealth, and personalized care.
  5. Enhance Policy, Education, and Health Systems Research
    Publish research that informs policymakers, educators, and healthcare leaders about system effectiveness, resource utilization, and population health patterns.
  6. Ensure Ethical and Responsible Publishing
    Uphold the highest ethical standards, emphasizing transparency, originality, reproducibility, and integrity.
  7. Facilitate Global Participation
    Provide opportunities for established scholars, early-career researchers, and students—especially from underserved regions—to disseminate valuable scientific contributions.

 

Scope

IJHR welcomes submissions across a broad spectrum of topics, reflecting the diverse nature of contemporary health sciences:

  1. Rehabilitation Sciences
  • Physiotherapy and Physical Rehabilitation
  • Occupational Therapy
  • Speech-Language Pathology
  • Assistive Technology Development
  • Neurorehabilitation and cognitive rehabilitation
  • Geriatric and pediatric rehabilitation
  • Sports rehabilitation and athletic performance
  1. Allied and Applied Health Sciences
  • Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Medical Laboratory Technology
  • Radiologic and Imaging Sciences
  • Respiratory Therapy
  • Anesthesia Technology
  • Biomedical Engineering and Health Technology
  1. Clinical and Medical Sciences
  • Musculoskeletal disorders
  • Internal medicine and chronic disease management
  • Pain management
  • Neurological conditions
  • Cardiopulmonary sciences
  • Orthopedic and surgical sciences
  • Community and family medicine
  1. Public Health, Health Promotion, and Preventive Medicine
  • Health education and behavior change
  • Epidemiology
  • Environmental health
  • Occupational health and safety
  • Digital health and telemedicine practices
  1. Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Sciences
  • Pharmacology and drug development
  • Clinical pharmacy
  • Therapeutic interventions
  • Genomics, precision medicine, and molecular diagnostics
  1. Health Policy, Systems, and Education
  • Health policy analysis
  • Clinical guidelines and implementation science
  • Evidence-based teaching and curriculum design
  • Interprofessional education
  • Quality assurance and healthcare management

The journal accepts:

  • Original Research
  • Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
  • Scoping Reviews
  • Case Reports
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines
  • Special Communications
  • Commentaries and Opinions
  • Letters to the Editor

This wide coverage ensures that IJHR remains a comprehensive repository for multidisciplinary research.

 

PUBLICATION FREQUENCY

Biannual Publication (2023–2024)

During its initial establishment phase, the journal adopted a biannual publication frequency, releasing two issues per year:

  • July (Mid-Year Issue)
  • December (Year-End Issue)

This schedule allowed the journal to develop its editorial processes, expand its reviewer base, enhance submission quality, and establish strong governance frameworks aligned with international publishing standards.

Focus During Biannual Phase

  • Strengthening journal identity
  • Increasing submission volume and diversity
  • Building a high-quality peer reviewer database
  • Standardizing editorial workflows
  • Streamlining ethical and compliance frameworks

The biannual model enabled the journal to ensure consistency, timely processing, and adherence to global publishing protocols during its formative years.

 

Monthly Publication (2025 Onward)

Starting January 2025, IJHR transitioned to a monthly publication frequency in response to:

  • Increased manuscript submissions
  • Growing international readership
  • Expanded editorial and reviewer capacity
  • Demand for faster publication cycles
  • The journal’s evolution into a mature, established platform

Current Frequency: 12 Issues Annually

Each issue is published at the end of each month.

Benefits of Monthly Publication

  • Provides rapid dissemination of emerging research
  • Enhances visibility and citation potential
  • Supports authors’ academic and professional advancement
  • Allows more flexible and timely handling of special issues
  • Strengthens competitiveness with high-impact international journals

This upgrade aligns IJHR with global standards of active, dynamic scientific publishing.

 

TIMELINES OF PUBLICATION OF ISSUES

Biannual Timelines (2023–2024)

  • July Issue: Published between July 25–31
  • December Issue: Published between December 25–31

Manuscript processing for these issues followed structured submission windows to ensure editorial quality:

  • January–April: Submissions and initial peer review for July issue
  • July–October: Submissions and peer review for December issue

 

Monthly Timelines (2025 Onward)

Starting January 2025, each issue is published on the last calendar day of the month:

Month

Publication Date

January

31 January

February

28/29 February

March

31 March

April

30 April

May

31 May

June

30 June

July

31 July

August

31 August

September

30 September

October

31 October

November

30 November

December

31 December

Editorial Workflow for Monthly Issues

  • Rolling submissions accepted year-round.
  • Manuscripts undergo initial screening within 3–5 days.
  • The peer review cycle typically completes within 15–20 days.
  • Accepted manuscripts move immediately into production for the next available issue.

Advantages of Defined Timelines

  • Ensures predictability for authors
  • Supports faster academic progression and citation growth
  • Enhances journal transparency
  • Demonstrates organizational efficiency
  • Meets expectations of international indexing databases

PEER REVIEW POLICY & PROCESS

A Rigorous and Transparent Framework Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Editorial Excellence

The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) employs a highly structured, transparent, and internationally compliant peer review system, designed to uphold the highest standards of scientific rigor, ethical practice, and editorial quality. Peer review is the foundation of the journal’s scholarly integrity, ensuring that all published work undergoes thorough, objective, and unbiased evaluation by experts in the field.

IJHR follows a double-blind peer review process, in which reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. This methodology is globally recognized for minimizing bias and strengthening the objectivity and fairness of manuscript assessments.

The peer review process is guided by the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). Every manuscript is evaluated according to stringent international guidelines, ensuring integrity, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and contribution to scientific progress.

 

  1. Objectives of the Peer Review System

The peer review process at IJHR is established to achieve the following key objectives:

  1. Ensure scientific validity

Reviewers evaluate the methodological soundness, analytical rigor, and appropriate interpretation of results.

  1. Maintain editorial quality

Manuscripts are assessed for clarity, coherence, organization, and alignment with journal standards.

  1. Guarantee originality and ethical compliance

Reviewers help identify plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate publication, and conflicts of interest.

  1. Provide constructive feedback

Authors are guided on how to strengthen conceptual clarity, methodological transparency, and academic writing.

  1. Protect research integrity

Reviewers safeguard against fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and unethical research practices.

  1. Improve scientific contribution

Manuscripts are evaluated for their relevance, novelty, impact, and contribution to the existing literature.

 

  1. Stages of the Double-Blind Peer Review Process

The IJHR peer review system includes six structured stages, each designed to ensure quality, transparency, timeliness, and fairness.

 

Stage 1: Submission and Initial Administrative Screening (Day 0–3)

Upon receiving a manuscript:

  1. The editorial office performs a preliminary technical check, including:
    • Adherence to journal format
    • Completeness of submission files
    • Structured abstract
    • Ethical approval statements
    • Copyright and author declarations
    • Plagiarism screening (Turnitin or equivalent)
    • Word count, structure, tables/figures formatting
  2. Manuscripts failing basic criteria may be returned to the authors for correction.
  3. Only technically compliant manuscripts proceed to the next stage.

 

Stage 2: Initial Editorial Evaluation by Section Editor (Day 3–7)

The assigned Section Editor evaluates the manuscript for:

  • Fit with journal aims and scope
  • Scientific significance
  • Theoretical relevance
  • Ethical compliance
  • Quality of study design and methodology
  • Clarity of research questions
  • Potential contribution to the field

At this stage, the editor may:

  • Proceed to peer review
  • Request revision before peer review
  • Desk reject if the manuscript does not meet minimum scientific standards

Desk rejections help maintain a high level of academic quality and streamline reviewer workload.

 

Stage 3: Reviewer Selection (Day 5–10)

Each manuscript is assigned two to three independent reviewers, selected based on:

  • Subject expertise
  • Academic qualifications
  • Prior reviewer performance
  • Absence of conflicts of interest
  • Publication record
  • Geographic and institutional diversity

Reviewer identities are kept confidential to preserve anonymity.

 

Stage 4: Double-Blind Peer Review (Day 10–30)

Reviewers provide detailed evaluations addressing:

  1. Originality and significance
  2. Research design and methodology
  3. Statistical or qualitative rigor
  4. Ethical compliance
  5. Clarity and coherence of writing
  6. Relevance to literature
  7. Logical structure of argument
  8. Strength of evidence and validity of conclusions
  9. Limitations and potential improvements

Each reviewer submits:

  • A detailed narrative report
  • A recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject)
  • Annotated comments (if applicable)
  • Confidential notes to the editor

 

Stage 5: Editorial Decision (Day 30–35)

The Section Editor or Editor-in-Chief reviews:

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • Reviewer reports
  • Overall scientific and editorial merit

Decisions typically fall into one of the following:

  • Accept without changes
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Request major revisions and resubmission
  • Reject with the option to resubmit
  • Reject

The editor ensures that decisions are fair, evidence-based, and aligned with journal policies.

 

Stage 6: Revision and Final Evaluation (Day 35–50)

Authors submit a point-by-point response addressing:

  • Reviewer comments
  • Editorial suggestions
  • Clarifications on methodology
  • Improved data transparency
  • Enhanced discussion and justification

In some cases, revised manuscripts are returned to reviewers for re-evaluation.

 

Stage 7: Production, Copyediting, and Publication

Once accepted:

  • Manuscripts undergo professional copyediting
  • Authors approve proofs
  • Articles are assigned DOIs
  • Final versions are published in the next scheduled issue

This process ensures high editorial quality and alignment with international publishing norms.

 

STANDARD REVIEWER’S GUIDELINES

Best Practices for Objective, Ethical, and High-Quality Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining scientific and editorial excellence. IJHR provides clear, structured reviewer guidelines aligned with COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and established international peer review frameworks.

 

  1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Maintain confidentiality
  • Provide constructive, unbiased feedback
  • Complete reviews within the assigned timeframe
  • Disclose conflicts of interest
  • Report suspected ethical violations
  • Evaluate methodology and data integrity thoroughly

They must not:

  • Use manuscript information for personal research
  • Share manuscript content with third parties
  • Allow professional relationships to bias reviews

 

  1. Components of a High-Quality Review Report

Reviewers should provide commentary on:

  1. Title and Abstract
  • Appropriateness
  • Structure
  • Clarity and accuracy
  1. Introduction and Literature Review
  • Relevance of background
  • Clarity of research objectives
  • Identification of gaps addressed
  1. Methods
  • Study design appropriateness
  • Sampling techniques
  • Validity and reliability of tools
  • Ethical approval documentation
  • Statistical or qualitative rigor
  1. Results
  • Clarity of data presentation
  • Appropriateness of statistical tests
  • Alignment with research questions
  • Transparency of analysis
  1. Discussion
  • Interpretation of findings
  • Comparison with existing literature
  • Limitations and implications
  • Justification of conclusions
  1. Tables, Figures, and Supplementary Files
  • Accuracy and clarity
  • Proper labeling and referencing
  • Ethical image presentation
  1. Ethical Compliance
  • Human/animal ethics statements
  • Consent procedures
  • Transparency in reporting
  1. Overall Contribution
  • Originality
  • Scientific significance
  • Practical relevance
  • Potential impact

 

  1. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers must select one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revision Required
  • Reject
  • Resubmit as New Manuscript

Each decision must be accompanied by clear justification.

 

  1. Reviewer Conduct and Integrity

Reviewers agree to:

  • Declare conflicts of interest immediately
  • Decline reviews outside their expertise
  • Refrain from hostile or disrespectful comments
  • Support constructive scientific improvement

 

ORIGINALITY AND PLAGIARISM POLICY

Ensuring Ethical Scholarship and Protection of Intellectual Property

IJHR follows strict plagiarism and originality policies aligned with:

  • COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • ICMJE Recommendations
  • WAME Policy Statements
  • Turnitin Similarity Standards

IJHR is dedicated to preventing academic misconduct, ensuring that published articles reflect original, ethical, and responsible research.

 

  1. Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism includes but is not limited to:

  • Copying text, images, tables, or data without attribution
  • Self-plagiarism or duplicate publication
  • Inadequate paraphrasing
  • Misappropriation of ideas, methods, or results
  • Redundant publication
  • Salami slicing
  • Republishing previously published work
  • Using AI-generated content without disclosure

 

  1. Turnitin Similarity Check Requirements

Each manuscript undergoes screening using Turnitin or equivalent similarity detection tools.

IJHR acceptable threshold:

<20% overall similarity (excluding references)

High similarity in any section may require:

  • Revision
  • Resubmission
  • Editorial investigation
  • Rejection

 

  1. Procedures for Handling Plagiarism

Depending on severity:

  1. Minor Overlap
  • Request for revision and proper citation
  1. Moderate Plagiarism
  • Major revisions required
  • Warning issued to authors
  1. Severe Plagiarism
  • Immediate rejection
  • Author’s institution notified
  • Ban from future submissions

In published articles:

  • Expression of Concern
  • Correction Notice
  • Retraction (Serious Breach)

 

  1. AI-Generated Content and AI Ethics

Authors must disclose any use of:

  • ChatGPT
  • Large Language Models
  • AI-based writing tools
  • Automated data-processing systems

AI cannot replace original scholarly work. Undisclosed AI usage falls under academic misconduct.

 

  1. Data Fabrication and Falsification

Defined as:

  • Manipulating images
  • Altering datasets
  • Presenting fabricated results

Such misconduct leads to immediate rejection or retraction.

 

SUBSCRIPTION DETAILS

Commitment to Global Open Access and Scientific Equity

IJHR operates under a full open-access model, ensuring free, unrestricted access to all published content worldwide. This model supports global equity in scientific knowledge, especially for low- and middle-income countries.

  1. Subscription Fees

✔ No Subscription Fees

All journal issues and articles are available free of charge to:

  • Researchers
  • Students
  • Clinicians
  • Educators
  • Academic institutions
  • Libraries
  • Policymakers
  • Public health organizations

There are:

  • No paywalls
  • No login requirements
  • No institutional barriers

 

  1. Benefits of Open Access
  2. Greater Global Visibility

Articles are accessible to global readers, increasing citation potential and academic impact.

  1. Enhanced Knowledge Dissemination

Healthcare professionals worldwide gain access to best evidence.

  1. Equity and Inclusion

Researchers from low-resource settings receive equal opportunity for access.

  1. Knowledge Translation

Open access supports practical implementation of research in clinical and public health settings.

  1. Compliance with Funding Agencies

Many donors require open-access dissemination; IJHR fulfills these conditions.

 

  1. Licensing and Permitted Use

IJHR content is published under:

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Readers may:

  • Download
  • Share
  • Use for education
  • Distribute the PDF

As long as:

  • Proper citation is provided
  • Content is not modified
  • Usage is non-commercial

 

  1. Indexing and Discoverability

IJHR aims for global indexing coverage. Open-access policies support discoverability in:

  • Google Scholar
  • ResearchGate
  • Semantic Scholar
  • Dimensions
  • OpenAlex
  • Crossref metadata
  • OAI repositories

 

  1. Archiving Policy

IJHR uses:

  • PKP Private LOCKSS Network
  • Full DOI assignment

Ensuring long-term preservation, redundancy, and accessibility.

JOURNAL OPERATIONS

A Transparent, Efficient, and Internationally Standardized Publishing Workflow

The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) operates through a robust, transparent, and highly structured editorial and administrative system designed to maintain scientific rigor, publishing integrity, and global accessibility. The journal adheres to internationally recognized standards for scholarly publishing, ensuring that all operational procedures—from manuscript submission to final publication—are consistent, ethical, and aligned with best practices.

Journal operations at IJHR are built upon five foundational pillars:

  1. Transparency and Accountability
  2. Scientific Integrity and Editorial Rigor
  3. Efficient Workflow Management
  4. Data Security and Privacy Protection
  5. Commitment to Global Accessibility and Inclusion

 

  1. Governance and Editorial Structure

IJHR operates under the governance of Health and Research Insights, the journal’s parent publishing organization. The journal’s editorial structure ensures clear decision-making channels, accountability, and high academic standards.

The editorial structure includes:

  • Editor-in-Chief: Leads scientific direction, editorial governance, and final publication decisions.
  • Managing Editor: Ensures operational management, workflow coordination, and policy implementation.
  • Associate Editors / Section Editors: Oversee peer review, evaluate manuscripts for technical and disciplinary accuracy.
  • Editorial Advisory Board: Provides strategic guidance, policy oversight, and expertise in ethical publishing.
  • Peer Reviewers: Subject-matter experts providing independent evaluation of manuscripts.
  • Technical and Production Staff: Manage formatting, typesetting, DOI assignment, and online publication.

Each position operates under defined roles and responsibilities to ensure impartiality, consistency, and adherence to international publishing ethics.

 

  1. Manuscript Processing Workflow

The journal follows a structured workflow that ensures:

  • timely handling of submissions
  • uniform application of editorial standards
  • secure processing of author data
  • fair distribution of reviewer assignments
  • consistent formatting and archiving
  1. Submission Management

Submissions are accepted via a secure online platform or designated email portals. Each manuscript is logged, assigned a unique identifier, and screened for completeness.

  1. Screening and Technical Check

The editorial office evaluates:

  • formatting compliance
  • ethical approval statements
  • copyright declarations
  • authorship verification
  • similarity (plagiarism) reports
  • completeness of figures, tables, and supplementary files

This step ensures efficiency by preventing incomplete or non-compliant manuscripts from entering peer review.

  1. Editor Assignment

Based on subject specialization, manuscripts are assigned to an editor who determines whether the submission fits the journal’s thematic scope and quality expectations.

  1. Peer Review Process

A double-blind peer review process is applied to maintain objectivity and fairness. Peer reviewers submit detailed reports, which inform editorial decisions.

  1. Revision Cycle

Authors respond to reviewer comments through point-by-point responses. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

  1. Final Acceptance and Production

Once accepted, manuscripts proceed to:

  • language editing
  • copyediting
  • typesetting
  • reference validation
  • DOI assignment
  • metadata creation
  • online publication
  1. Post-Publication Monitoring

IJHR is committed to long-term stewardship of published content. This includes:

  • digital archiving
  • correction and retraction mechanisms
  • citation tracking
  • dissemination through indexing partners

 

  1. Technology, Digital Infrastructure, and Archiving

IJHR uses a combination of modern digital tools and best practices to ensure secure, efficient, and sustainable operations.

  1. Digital Tools Used
  • Crossref DOI assignment
  • Turnitin or equivalent similarity detection systems
  • LOCKSS / PKP Private Network for digital preservation
  • ORCID integration for author identity verification
  • Cloud-based content management systems
  • OAI-PMH compliance for indexing
  1. Long-Term Digital Archiving

All published content is archived using:

  • LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)
  • CLOCKSS participation (where applicable)
  • Secure backup servers
  • Institutional repository permission policies

 

  1. Quality Assurance and Research Integrity

Quality assurance measures include:

  • adherence to COPE core practices
  • editorial quality checks before and after peer review
  • plagiarism detection at multiple workflow stages
  • ethical compliance verification
  • reviewer performance monitoring
  • editorial audits of accepted manuscripts
  • consistency in metadata and indexing standards

These measures ensure that IJHR maintains trustworthiness and aligns with international expectations for high-quality academic publishing.

 

  1. Inclusivity, Accessibility, and Author Support

IJHR operates within the principles of:

  • equitable access
  • global inclusivity
  • responsible open access

The journal supports authors from diverse backgrounds, particularly those from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), through:

  • fee waivers
  • simplified submission support
  • editorial mentoring for early-career researchers
  • accessible content formats
  • strong data-sharing policies

 

ETHICS STATEMENT: ETHICAL CONSENT & GUIDELINES, MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Upholding Integrity, Transparency, and Ethical Conduct in Scholarly Publishing

Ethical practice is foundational to IJHR’s mission. The journal adheres to the ethical frameworks of COPE, ICMJE, WAME, and OASPA, ensuring that all stakeholders—authors, editors, reviewers, and readers—are protected from ethical misconduct, data manipulation, and breaches of editorial integrity.

 

  1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
  2. Originality and Integrity

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts:

  • are original
  • have not been plagiarized
  • do not contain fabricated or falsified data
  • are free from duplicate publication
  1. Authorship Criteria

In line with ICMJE:

All authors must have made:

  1. Substantial contribution to conception, design, data acquisition, or analysis
  2. Contribution to drafting or revising the manuscript
  3. Approval of the final version
  4. Accountability for all aspects of the work
  1. Ethical Treatment of Human and Animal Subjects

Authors must:

  • secure IRB/ethics board approval
  • obtain informed consent from participants
  • follow national and international research ethics laws
  • minimize harm and ensure confidentiality

Studies involving animal subjects must adhere to:

  • institutional animal care guidelines
  • international standards for humane treatment
  1. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Authors must declare:

  • financial interests
  • institutional affiliations
  • funding sources
  • personal or academic relationships

 

  1. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must:

  • make impartial, evidence-based decisions
  • avoid decisions influenced by personal bias
  • maintain confidentiality
  • manage conflicts of interest transparently
  • investigate ethical complaints promptly

Editorial misconduct includes:

  • coercive citation
  • data manipulation
  • prejudicial decision-making
  • misuse of privileged information

IJHR strictly prohibits these practices.

 

  1. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are bound by COPE ethical guidelines for peer reviewers.

They must:

  • maintain confidentiality
  • provide objective, constructive feedback
  • complete reviews on time
  • declare conflicts of interest
  • report ethical concerns such as plagiarism, fraud, or data manipulation

They must not:

  • appropriate ideas from manuscripts
  • engage in hostility, bias, or personal criticism
  • delay review intentionally
  • share or distribute manuscripts

 

MALPRACTICE POLICY

IJHR maintains zero tolerance for publishing misconduct of any kind. The journal uses a systematic approach for identifying, investigating, correcting, and preventing malpractice.

 

  1. Types of Publishing Misconduct
  • Plagiarism
  • Self-plagiarism
  • Data fabrication
  • Data falsification
  • Image manipulation
  • Duplicate publication
  • Artificial intelligence misuse without disclosure
  • Manipulated peer review
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest
  • Ghost authorship or guest authorship
  • Ethical violations in human/animal studies
  • Citation manipulation
  • Breach of confidentiality

 

  1. Investigation Process

In suspected cases, the journal:

  1. Conducts an internal editorial review
  2. Contacts the author(s) for clarification
  3. Consults COPE flowcharts for proper procedural guidance
  4. Verifies data, images, and ethics documents
  5. Requests raw data or supplementary files
  6. Seeks external expert opinions when needed

Investigations follow principles of:

  • transparency
  • fairness
  • documented decision-making
  • timely resolution

 

  1. Outcomes of Investigation

Depending on severity, actions include:

  1. Pre-Publication Issues
  • correction and resubmission
  • extended revision
  • rejection of manuscript
  • notification to authors’ institutions
  1. Post-Publication Issues
  • publication of erratum
  • publication of corrigendum
  • publication of expression of concern
  • full retraction with clear justification
  • banning authors for up to 3–5 years
  1. Severe Cases

If misconduct involves fraud or unethical experimentation, the journal may:

  • notify indexing services
  • notify funders
  • notify regulatory bodies

 

PRIVACY STATEMENT

Protection of Personal Data, Confidentiality, and Digital Security

The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation is committed to protecting personal information and ensuring compliance with:

  • GDPR principles
  • Data protection laws
  • COPE privacy recommendations
  • Secure data management practices

The Privacy Statement outlines how the journal collects, stores, uses, and safeguards personal data of authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.

 

  1. Information Collected

The journal collects information such as:

  • Names and affiliations
  • Email addresses
  • ORCID iDs
  • Phone numbers (if needed for communication)
  • Manuscript files
  • Peer review reports
  • Metadata used for indexing

Information is collected solely for editorial and publication purposes.

 

  1. How Information Is Used

Data is used to:

  • manage submissions
  • process peer reviews
  • communicate with authors and reviewers
  • maintain publication records
  • ensure academic integrity
  • disseminate published content
  • comply with metadata requirements

IJHR does not sell, share, or distribute personal information to third parties for marketing or commercial gain.

 

  1. Data Storage and Security

Data is stored securely using:

  • encrypted servers
  • password-protected systems
  • controlled administrative access
  • regular backups
  • compliance with digital preservation standards

 

  1. User Rights

Users have the right to:

  • request access to their information
  • request correction of inaccurate data
  • request deletion of unnecessary data
  • withdraw consent where applicable

The journal will fulfill such requests promptly.

 

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

Protection of Intellectual Property and Responsible Use

All content published in IJHR is governed by international copyright laws and the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).

 

  1. Author Rights

Authors retain:

  • full copyright
  • the right to reuse their work for academic purposes
  • the right to deposit manuscripts in repositories
  • the right to use content for teaching, presentations, and non-commercial purposes

Authors grant the journal:

  • the right to publish
  • the right to archive
  • the right to distribute
  • the right to assign DOIs
  • the right to index metadata

 

  1. User Rights

Under the CC BY-NC-ND license, readers may:

  • download content
  • share content for educational and non-commercial use
  • cite the work with proper attribution

Users may not:

  • alter, remix, or transform the content
  • use it commercially
  • publish derivative works
  • use text or images without citation

 

  1. Permissions and Reuse

Requests for:

  • translations
  • derivative works
  • commercial reprints

must be submitted to the journal’s editorial office for approval.

 

  1. Copyright Infringement

Unauthorized use may result in:

  • legal action
  • takedown notices
  • revocation of user access
  • notification to institutions

DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

Ensuring Transparency, Accountability, and Trust in Scholarly Publishing

The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) is committed to maintaining the highest levels of editorial transparency, research integrity, and ethical publishing. Disclosure of competing interests and potential conflicts of interest (COI) is central to sustaining trust among authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.

Clear identification and proper management of conflicts of interest ensure that scholarly work is evaluated and disseminated without bias, distortion, or undue influence.

This policy is written in alignment with the standards set by:

  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
  • Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)
  • Council of Science Editors (CSE)

 

  1. Definition of Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when secondary interests (financial, personal, professional, academic, or institutional) have the potential to influence—or appear to influence—primary scholarly responsibilities such as:

  • conducting research
  • interpreting findings
  • writing manuscripts
  • evaluating manuscripts
  • making editorial decisions

Conflicts do not automatically imply wrongdoing; however, undisclosed or mismanaged conflicts can jeopardize the credibility of scientific work.

 

  1. Types of Conflicts of Interest
  2. Financial Conflicts

These include:

  • employment or consultancy arrangements
  • stock ownership or equity interests
  • honoraria or speaker fees
  • funding from commercial entities
  • paid expert testimony
  • royalties or patent rights
  • payments for research materials or equipment
  1. Personal Conflicts

These involve:

  • close personal relationships
  • academic rivalry or favoritism
  • family relationships
  • personal disputes
  • mentoring or supervisory relationships
  1. Professional Conflicts

These may arise from:

  • editorial roles at competing journals
  • positions on advisory boards
  • organizational leadership roles
  • competing research agendas
  • intellectual passion or personal beliefs that may bias judgment
  1. Institutional Conflicts

These include:

  • organizational affiliations influencing research outcomes
  • institutional funding that shapes study design
  • partnerships with commercial vendors or sponsors
  1. Academic Conflicts

These include:

  • disputes over authorship
  • competition for grants or recognition
  • pressure to publish for hiring or promotion

 

  1. Disclosure Requirements for Authors

All submitting authors must complete a Competing Interests Disclosure Statement, conforming to ICMJE guidelines.

Authors must disclose:

  • all funding sources
  • the role of the funder in study design, analysis, or reporting
  • financial relationships within the past three years
  • paid employment, consultancies, or grants
  • personal or professional relationships that may influence the manuscript
  • AI use during manuscript writing or data analysis
  • previous versions or related studies published elsewhere

Disclosure must appear in both:

  1. The manuscript submission form
  2. The published article under “Competing Interests”

Failure to disclose relevant conflicts may lead to:

  • rejection
  • retraction
  • institutional reporting

 

  1. Disclosure Requirements for Reviewers

Reviewers must immediately inform editors if they:

  • know the author(s)
  • have collaborated recently with the author(s)
  • have personal or professional relationships that may influence evaluation
  • are working on similar research
  • have financial interests in the study’s outcome
  • feel unable to provide an unbiased review

If a conflict is identified, the reviewer must decline the review request.

 

  1. Disclosure Requirements for Editors

Editors must:

  • recuse themselves from decisions involving manuscripts where they have conflicts
  • not handle papers authored by colleagues from their own institution
  • avoid manuscripts where they have financial or personal connections
  • refrain from using privileged information for personal research

Alternative editorial oversight is assigned in such cases.

 

  1. Public Disclosure

Conflicts of interest relevant to the study will be openly published on the article’s first page.

Examples include:

  • “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”
  • “Author A received funding from XYZ Corporation.”
  • “Author B served as a consultant for ABC Foundation.”

Transparency ensures readers can interpret the research ethically and responsibly.

 

  1. Management of Undisclosed or Discovered Conflicts

If a conflict emerges post-submission:

  • the editor conducts a formal investigation
  • authors may be asked for clarification
  • manuscripts may be withdrawn or rejected
  • published articles may be corrected or retracted

Corrections include:

  • Erratum (minor oversight)
  • Expression of Concern
  • Retraction (major ethical breach)

 

CORRECTION AND RETRACTION OF RESEARCH ARTICLES

Upholding Scientific Accuracy, Research Integrity, and Editorial Accountability

IJHR is firmly committed to maintaining accuracy and integrity in the scholarly record. Errors, whether unintentional or resulting from misconduct, require clear, transparent, and timely mechanisms for correction. The journal follows COPE Retraction Guidelines and Crossref standards for updating metadata to ensure traceability.

 

  1. Types of Post-Publication Updates
  2. Erratum

An erratum is issued when the journal introduces an error during editing, typesetting, or production.

Examples:

  • incorrect author affiliation
  • mislabelled figure
  • typographical error influencing interpretation
  1. Corrigendum

A corrigendum is published when authors identify mistakes in the research.

Examples:

  • incorrect data labeling
  • minor methodological oversight
  • updated author information

Errors must not alter scientific conclusions.

  1. Expression of Concern

Issued when:

  • possible misconduct is under investigation
  • issues are unresolved or pending institutional inquiry
  • concerns arise regarding data integrity

This alerts readers without concluding wrongdoing.

  1. Retraction

Retraction occurs when:

  • results are proven unreliable
  • data is fabricated, falsified, or manipulated
  • plagiarism or duplicate publication is discovered
  • unethical research practices are confirmed
  • copyright violations occur
  • authors fail to disclose conflicts of interest influencing findings

Retractions maintain the scholarly integrity of the literature.

 

  1. Procedure for Corrections
  1. Error is reported by readers, authors, reviewers, editors, or institutions.
  2. Editorial team conducts an initial evaluation.
  3. Authors are contacted for explanation and supporting documentation.
  4. Corrections are drafted and approved by authors.
  5. Updated versions are published with:
    • DOI
    • time stamp
    • cross-referencing to original article
  6. Indexing services (Crossref, Google Scholar, etc.) are notified.

 

  1. Procedure for Retraction

Retractions follow COPE’s retraction flowcharts:

  1. Identification of Issue

Concerns may arise from:

  • peer reviewers
  • readers
  • whistleblowers
  • institutional bodies
  • post-publication evaluation
  1. Investigation

Editors request:

  • raw data
  • ethics approval letters
  • confirmation from coauthors
  • institutional response

Investigations must be:

  • confidential
  • thorough
  • unbiased
  • well documented
  1. Editorial Decision

Based on evidence:

  • retraction
  • correction
  • expression of concern
  • rejection of retraction request (if inappropriate)
  1. Publication of Retraction Notice

A retraction notice must:

  • be freely accessible
  • include retraction reasons
  • identify responsible parties if appropriate
  • not simply remove the article
  • not stigmatize authors unfairly

The original article remains accessible but watermarked with “RETRACTED” for transparency.

 

  1. Authors’ Responsibilities Post-Retraction

Authors must:

  • cooperate with investigations
  • provide data upon request
  • submit clarifications
  • avoid obstructing the process
  • respond ethically to findings

Failure to cooperate may result in:

  • author bans
  • institutional notification
  • funder notification

 

  1. Republication Policy

Corrected articles may be republished only if errors are not related to:

  • scientific misconduct
  • ethical violations
  • plagiarism or falsification

If the foundational integrity of the study is compromised, the article must remain retracted.

 

ADHERENCE TO COMMUNITY STANDARDS

Promoting Ethical Behavior, Inclusive Scholarship, and Responsible Publishing

IJHR is deeply committed to maintaining a scholarly environment that respects diversity, promotes ethical conduct, and adheres to global scientific community standards. These standards reflect principles of academic integrity, social responsibility, cultural inclusivity, and professional accountability.

Community standards regulate the conduct of:

  • authors
  • reviewers
  • editors
  • readers
  • institutions

They ensure that research is conducted, reviewed, and disseminated responsibly.

 

  1. Research Integrity

All research must follow internationally accepted standards of:

  • honesty in data reporting
  • accuracy in analysis
  • originality in writing
  • transparency in methodology
  • replicability where applicable
  • rigorous scientific reasoning

Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or selective reporting violate community norms and lead to disciplinary action.

 

  1. Ethical Research Conduct

IJHR follows ethics guidelines set by:

  • Declaration of Helsinki
  • CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences)
  • Belmont Report
  • Local IRB/ethics committees

Responsibilities include:

  • obtaining ethics approval
  • securing informed consent
  • protecting participant data
  • minimizing harm and risk
  • using humane animal research practices

 

  1. Inclusive and Respectful Scholarship

The journal promotes:

  • diversity of authorship
  • gender-inclusive language
  • culturally sensitive communication
  • non-discriminatory editorial decisions

No manuscript may contain:

  • discriminatory language
  • derogatory statements
  • misleading generalizations
  • unethical stereotyping

 

  1. Transparency and Openness

Researchers must follow principles of open science, which include:

  • openness in reporting methods
  • transparency in data sharing
  • clarity in statistical procedures
  • availability of supporting materials
  • disclosure of tools such as AI models

 

  1. Respect for Intellectual Property

Authors must:

  • appropriately cite others
  • acknowledge contributions
  • respect copyright laws
  • avoid misrepresenting ideas

Community standards protect intellectual ownership and encourage academic honesty.

 

  1. Environmental and Social Responsibility

Where applicable, research should:

  • avoid environmental harm
  • promote sustainable scientific practices
  • consider community impact in public health studies
  • include vulnerable populations ethically

 

  1. Professional Conduct for Editors and Reviewers

Community expectations include:

  • respectful communication
  • objective evaluation
  • confidentiality
  • avoidance of personal criticism
  • adherence to timelines
  • declaration of conflicts

These ensure fairness within scholarly exchange.

 

  1. Community Engagement and Accountability

IJHR encourages:

  • feedback from readers
  • proactive reporting of errors
  • whistleblowing protections
  • post-publication critique

Scholarship evolves through continuous dialogue.

 

  1. Sanctions for Violations

Violations of community standards may result in:

  • manuscript rejection
  • retraction
  • editorial bans
  • notification to institutions
  • removal from reviewer or editor panels

The journal follows COPE flowcharts for all investigations.

EDITOR SELECTION POLICY

Ensuring Editorial Excellence, Ethical Stewardship, and Scholarly Independence

The editorial leadership of a scholarly journal is central to ensuring research integrity, scientific rigor, ethical decision-making, and the overall quality of published work. The Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) maintains a highly structured, transparent, and internationally compliant Editor Selection Policy designed to uphold academic excellence and safeguard editorial independence from political, institutional, or commercial influence.

This policy outlines the criteria, procedures, responsibilities, conflict-of-interest safeguards, and ongoing performance expectations for all editorial board members, including:

  • Editor-in-Chief
  • Associate Editors
  • Section/Subject Editors
  • Statistical Editors
  • Editorial Advisors

The policy aligns with best practices defined by:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
  • Council of Science Editors (CSE)
  • Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)

 

  1. Purpose of the Policy

This policy ensures:

  • fair and merit-based recruitment
  • editorial independence from authors, reviewers, and sponsoring institutions
  • balanced representation of disciplines, geography, gender, and ethnicity
  • ethical conduct within editorial decision-making
  • commitment to scientific rigor and scholarly excellence

 

  1. Eligibility Criteria for Editors

All editorial candidates are evaluated on academic excellence, integrity, and professional reputation.

  1. Academic Qualifications

Editors must possess:

  • a doctoral degree (PhD, DSc, MD, or equivalent) in a field relevant to the journal
  • demonstrated research expertise with a strong publication record in reputable peer-reviewed journals
  • familiarity with global scientific publishing trends
  1. Professional Experience

Preferred candidates include:

  • experienced reviewers for international scientific journals
  • previous editorial board experience
  • demonstrated leadership in health or rehabilitation research
  • proven expertise in critical appraisal and scientific writing
  1. Ethical Attributes

Editors must:

  • demonstrate commitment to COPE and ICMJE ethical standards
  • maintain neutrality, fairness, and objectivity
  • respect confidentiality of submitted manuscripts
  • avoid conflicts of interest
  • uphold anti-plagiarism, anti-bias, and anti-discrimination standards
  1. Time Commitment

Editors must commit adequate time for:

  • prompt handling of manuscripts
  • communication with reviewers and authors
  • participation in editorial meetings
  • timely decision-making

 

  1. Recruitment and Selection Process

The selection process is transparent, structured, and documented.

  1. Identification of Candidates

Candidates are identified through:

  • open calls on the journal website
  • recommendations from the editorial board
  • searches of prominent scholars in the field
  • outreach to international academic networks
  1. Application Submission

Applicants submit:

  • detailed CV
  • list of publications
  • editorial or peer-review experience
  • statement of interest
  • vision statement for improving journal quality
  • disclosure of conflicts of interest
  1. Evaluation and Screening

A selection committee evaluates:

  • academic merit and scholarly contributions
  • communication skills
  • diversity and inclusivity goals
  • compliance with journal mission and values
  • ethical standing and past misconduct checks
  1. Interviews (if necessary)

High-ranking candidates may be interviewed to assess:

  • editorial philosophy
  • familiarity with ethical issues
  • ability to manage conflict situations
  • commitment to open-access and research transparency
  1. Final Approval and Appointment

The Editor-in-Chief or governing board approves final appointments.

All appointments are:

  • documented
  • publicly announced on the journal website
  • accompanied by a detailed role description

 

  1. Editorial Roles and Responsibilities
  2. Editor-in-Chief

Leads scientific direction and editorial policy development. Responsibilities include:

  • final decision-making authority
  • safeguarding ethical standards
  • oversight of peer-review integrity
  • supervision of editors and reviewers
  • journal strategy development
  • representing the journal internationally
  1. Associate Editors

Provide expert handling of manuscripts, ensuring fair peer review. Responsibilities:

  • selecting unbiased reviewers
  • ensuring timely reviews
  • evaluating reviewer feedback
  • recommending decisions
  • addressing appeals or misconduct signals
  1. Section Editors

Manage specialized disciplines, ensuring subject-matter accuracy.

  1. Statistical Editors

Evaluate quantitative methodology, statistical soundness, and reproducibility of findings.

  1. Editorial Advisors

Support journal strategy, ethics consultations, special issues, and scholarly development.

 

  1. Term Length and Renewal
  • Editors serve three-year terms, renewable upon performance review.
  • Renewal is contingent upon:
    • quality of manuscript handling
    • punctuality and responsiveness
    • contributions to journal development
    • adherence to ethical standards
    • promotion of journal visibility

 

  1. Conflict of Interest & Recusal

Editors must:

  • not handle manuscripts where conflicts exist
  • recuse themselves from decisions involving
    • colleagues
    • students
    • institutional collaborators
    • professional competitors
    • financial interests

The Editor-in-Chief appoints an alternate editor in such cases.

 

  1. Reasons for Removal

Editors may be removed due to:

  • violation of ethical standards
  • persistent delays in manuscript handling
  • unprofessional behavior
  • confirmed conflict of interest
  • research misconduct
  • discrimination or bias
  • lack of engagement in journal activities

 

DATA SHARING POLICY

Supporting Transparency, Reproducibility, and Open Science

Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) endorses the global movement toward Open Science, FAIR Data Principles, and responsible data stewardship. Data sharing strengthens scientific credibility, enables reproducibility, and accelerates innovation.

This policy complies with:

  • FAIR Principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable)
  • ICMJE Data Sharing Requirements
  • NIH and Wellcome Trust Data Principles
  • UNESCO Open Science Framework
  • COPE Ethical Guidelines

 

  1. Purpose of the Policy

This policy aims to:

  • promote transparency in research
  • ensure reproducibility of findings
  • facilitate new scholarship using existing datasets
  • foster international scientific collaboration
  • safeguard ethical use of sensitive data

 

  1. Scope

This policy applies to:

  • original research articles
  • systematic reviews and meta-analyses
  • qualitative studies (as applicable)
  • case studies (with de-identification)
  • clinical trials
  • laboratory research

 

  1. Data Availability Statement (Mandatory)

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement (DAS) in their manuscript, specifying:

  • WHERE the data are stored
  • HOW the data can be accessed
  • ANY restrictions and their justification
  • Repository DOI or accession number

Examples:

Open Access Data:
“Data supporting this study are available in Zenodo at DOI: xyz.”

Restricted Data:
“Due to patient confidentiality, data cannot be publicly shared. Access may be granted upon reasonable request and IRB approval.”

No Data Available:
“Data were not collected or generated for this study.”

 

  1. Accepted Data Repositories

IJHR accepts:

  1. General Repositories
  • Zenodo
  • Figshare
  • Dryad
  • Harvard Dataverse
  1. Clinical or Biomedical Repositories
  • ClinicalTrials.gov
  • Gene Expression Omnibus
  • UK Data Service
  • WHO ICTRP
  1. Institutional Repositories

University-level repositories are accepted if globally accessible.

 

  1. Ethical and Legal Considerations
  2. Human Subject Data

Authors must:

  • obtain informed consent specifically covering data sharing
  • de-identify all datasets
  • follow GDPR, HIPAA, or local privacy regulations
  • avoid sharing sensitive personal data
  1. Sensitive or High-Risk Data

Restrictions apply when:

  • sharing compromises privacy
  • legal barriers exist
  • cultural or community-based risks emerge

Authors must justify restrictions clearly.

 

  1. Data Citation Requirements

All datasets must be cited as:

  • separate entries in the reference list
  • containing DOI or persistent identifier
  • including creator name and repository name

This ensures academic credit for data creators.

 

  1. Compliance Monitoring

IJHR may:

  • request raw data during peer review
  • decline publication if data transparency is insufficient
  • apply editorial sanctions for violations

 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

Ensuring Responsible Integration of AI in Research, Peer Review, and Publishing

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly embedded in scholarly workflows. IJHR acknowledges its value but also recognizes risks related to ethics, transparency, bias, and scientific validity.

This policy aligns with:

  • ICMJE recommendations on AI
  • COPE AI and Publication Ethics Guidelines
  • UNESCO AI Ethics Framework
  • OECD AI Principles
  • Nature and Science AI publishing standards

 

  1. Principles of AI Use

Authors, reviewers, and editors must comply with:

  • transparency
  • accountability
  • ethical use
  • bias prevention
  • data protection

AI cannot replace human judgment.

 

  1. Allowable Uses of AI

AI tools may be used for:

  • grammar or language refinement
  • statistical assistance with transparency
  • code generation with verification
  • data visualization
  • preliminary literature screening

All AI participation must be disclosed.

 

  1. Prohibited Uses of AI

AI cannot be used for:

  • generating entire manuscripts
  • fabricating data, images, or references
  • peer review evaluations
  • making editorial decisions
  • drafting ethical approval documents
  • creating fabricated patient information
  • writing statistical results without human oversight

 

  1. Disclosure Requirements

Manuscripts must include an AI Usage Statement detailing:

  • tools used (e.g., ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, Copilot)
  • specific tasks supported
  • precautions taken to verify accuracy

Example:

“AI language tools were used to improve grammar and clarity. All content was reviewed and validated by the authors.”

Failure to disclose may result in:

  • rejection
  • retraction
  • blacklisting

 

  1. AI in Peer Review

Reviewers must not use AI to:

  • summarize manuscripts
  • generate review reports
  • store confidential documents in external AI tools

Permitted use:

  • grammar assistance in writing reviews (without uploading manuscript content)
  • conceptual brainstorming

 

  1. AI and Research Integrity

Authors must ensure that:

  • AI outputs are fully verified
  • AI-generated citations are real and verifiable
  • algorithms used are transparent
  • models are ethically trained

AI hallucinations or fabricated content constitute misconduct.

 

  1. Editorial Use of AI

Editors may use AI for:

  • plagiarism detection
  • reference matching
  • preliminary technical screening
  • workflow management

Editors may not use AI for:

  • making accept/reject decisions
  • interpreting scientific arguments
  • evaluating data integrity

 

  1. Data Privacy and AI

AI tools must comply with:

  • GDPR
  • HIPAA
  • local data protection laws

Personal or clinical data cannot be uploaded to open AI systems.

 

  1. Continuous Review of AI Policy

This policy will be reviewed annually to:

  • reflect emerging technologies
  • incorporate new global standards
  • safeguard research quality

 

GRANT SUPPORT POLICY

Ensuring Transparency, Research Integrity, and Responsible Funding Disclosure

Grant support plays an essential role in the advancement of high-quality scientific research. Recognizing its significance, the Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation (IJHR) maintains a comprehensive and transparent policy regarding funding disclosures to ensure full accountability, prevent bias, and promote scientific rigor. This policy upholds fairness, ethical responsibility, and global publishing standards. It further ensures that the involvement of funding bodies does not compromise the objectivity or independence of published research.

The policy fully aligns with:

  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) funding transparency guidelines
  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) best practices
  • World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) standards
  • Open Funder Registry requirements
  • Crossref Funder ID conventions
  • Good Financial Grant Practice (GFGP) principles

 

  1. Purpose of the Grant Support Policy

This policy ensures that:

  • All funding sources supporting a study are clearly disclosed
  • The role of funding bodies is transparent
  • Research independence is protected
  • Conflicts of interest arising from financial support are identified and managed
  • Readers are able to interpret research findings within appropriate financial context

Funding transparency enhances the credibility of published work and fosters trust between the journal, authors, institutions, and the global research community.

 

  1. Mandatory Funding Disclosure

All manuscripts must include a dedicated Funding Statement specifying:

  • the full name of each funding organization
  • grant numbers or identifiers
  • the principal investigator(s) associated with the grant
  • the scope and nature of the financial support
  • whether the funder had any involvement in the study design, data collection, analysis, or publication

Examples of acceptable statements:

  1. With Grant Support:
    “This study was supported by the Pakistan Higher Education Commission (HEC), Grant No. ABC-123. The funder had no role in study design, data analysis, or manuscript preparation.”
  2. Without Grant Support:
    “This research received no external funding.”
  3. Partially Supported:
    “Data collection was partially supported by the XYZ Medical Research Fund (Grant No. 4567). No other funding sources contributed.”

 

  1. Types of Funding That Must Be Disclosed

Authors must report:

  1. Direct Research Funding

Includes grants from:

  • governmental agencies
  • universities
  • non-profit foundations
  • international funding bodies
  • private organizations
  1. Indirect Funding or Institutional Support

Examples include:

  • laboratory resources provided by institutions
  • paid research assistants
  • access to specialized equipment
  • waived publication or software fees
  1. Commercial Funding

Funding received from:

  • pharmaceutical companies
  • medical device manufacturers
  • biotechnology corporations
  • private medical clinics or industry partners
  1. In-Kind Contributions

Such as:

  • donated equipment
  • free software
  • statistical support
  • training or workshops

Even non-monetary assistance may create potential bias and must be declared transparently.

 

  1. Funders’ Role in Research

The Funding Statement must also describe:

  • funder involvement (if any)
  • funder access to data
  • funder authority over publication decisions
  • funder influence on research methods or conclusions

If a funder has played a significant role, the authors must specify:

  • “Designed the study”
  • “Provided analytical tools”
  • “Participated in manuscript drafting”

If the funder had no role, the statement must explicitly say:

  • “The funder had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.”

This aligns with ICMJE expectations for research independence.

 

  1. Undisclosed Funding

Failure to disclose funding constitutes scientific misconduct and may lead to:

  • manuscript rejection
  • retraction of published articles
  • notification to institutions and funders
  • author sanctions

COPE-facilitated investigations may be initiated in such cases.

 

  1. Grant Support for Early-Career Researchers

IJHR encourages early-career researchers by:

  • acknowledging student-funded or self-funded projects
  • offering partial or full fee waivers for LMIC researchers
  • promoting equitable access to publishing

Supporting emerging scholars strengthens global research capacity and aligns with the journal’s values of inclusivity and academic empowerment.

 

  1. Tracking Funding in Published Articles

To ensure metadata accuracy:

  • IJHR assigns funder identifiers through the Crossref Open Funder Registry
  • Each article’s funding information becomes searchable and citable
  • Funding metadata is enabled for indexing in Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, OpenAlex, and Dimensions

This enhances the international visibility and credibility of the research.

 

  1. Ethical Considerations Related to Funding

Authors must ensure:

  • funding does not compromise participant safety or study ethics
  • funder expectations do not bias data interpretation
  • agreements with funders do not restrict data availability
  • financial circumstances do not influence authorship attribution

IJHR reserves the right to request original grant documents during investigations.

 

  1. Responsibility of Authors

Authors are responsible for:

  • obtaining ethical permission from funders for data sharing (where required)
  • ensuring funders are acknowledged appropriately
  • certifying that all funder requirements comply with journal ethics

Any discrepancies may lead to a formal inquiry.