Peer Review Policy

Epidemiology & Health Data Insights is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing. All manuscripts undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the integrity, quality, and originality of published content.

Review Process

    1.    Initial Assessment:
Upon submission, manuscripts are screened by the editorial team for alignment with the journal’s scope and basic quality criteria. Submissions that fail to meet these standards are returned to authors without external review.
    2.    Reviewer Selection:
Manuscripts passing the initial assessment are assigned to at least two expert reviewers with relevant subject matter expertise. Reviewer identities are anonymized to authors, and author identities are anonymized to reviewers.
    3.    Evaluation Criteria:
Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
    •    Originality and significance of the research.
    •    Robustness and transparency of methodology.
    •    Relevance and clarity of results and conclusions.
    •    Quality of data analysis and adherence to ethical guidelines.
    •    Overall contribution to the field of epidemiology and health data science.
    4.    Recommendations:
Based on the reviews, the editor makes a decision to:
    •    Accept the manuscript as is.
    •    Request minor or major revisions.
    •    Reject the manuscript with the possibility of resubmission.
    •    Reject outright.

Revision Process

Authors are provided with detailed feedback from reviewers and editors. Revised manuscripts undergo additional rounds of review as necessary, ensuring all concerns are addressed satisfactorily before acceptance.

Ethical Standards

    •    Confidentiality: All submitted manuscripts and review reports are treated with strict confidentiality.
    •    Conflict of Interest: Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves if necessary.
    •    Plagiarism and Misconduct: Manuscripts are screened for originality using plagiarism detection software, and any ethical concerns are handled in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Reviewer Acknowledgment

We value the contributions of our peer reviewers, and their efforts are recognized through annual acknowledgments on the journal’s website.

Timeline

The peer review process is designed to ensure timely decisions, with an average turnaround time of 4–6 weeks from submission to initial decision.