Publication Policies

Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS)

About the Journal

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal committed to advancing high-quality research across the broad spectrum of medical, clinical, and health sciences. Established under the academic vision of Ghurki Trust Teaching Hospital, the journal serves as a rigorous platform for disseminating scientific knowledge, promoting evidence-based practice, and fostering academic dialogue among clinicians, researchers, educators, policymakers, and multidisciplinary health professionals.

GJMHS upholds the principles of scientific rigor, editorial integrity, ethical transparency, and academic inclusivity, aligning its operations with globally recognized publication standards — including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) best practices.

As a scholarly outlet dedicated to the progression of scientific discovery, the journal prioritizes methodologically sound research, encourages interdisciplinary collaboration, and champions innovation in clinical practice, health policy, patient care, and public health systems. All published articles undergo a stringent double-blind peer-review process, ensuring unbiased evaluation, scientific accuracy, and intellectual depth.

GJMHS is fully open-access under a Creative Commons license, ensuring that all published work is freely accessible, discoverable, and reusable for educational, clinical, and research purposes. The journal emphasizes global visibility, integration into reputable indexing platforms, and long-term digital preservation through secure archiving systems. Each article is also assigned a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to ensure permanent accessibility, traceability, and international citation recognition.

As part of its mission, the journal seeks to contribute meaningfully to global health by promoting research that addresses emerging health challenges, strengthens clinical practices, and enhances healthcare delivery within both local and global contexts.

Aims and Scope

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences aims to:

Promote high-impact scientific research across medicine, health sciences, and interdisciplinary fields.
Encourage evidence-based clinical decision-making by disseminating robust research that informs practice, policy, and healthcare innovation.
Support emerging and established researchers by providing a transparent, ethical, and academically rigorous publishing environment.
Enhance global research visibility through open-access dissemination, DOIs, indexing partnerships, and long-term archiving.
Advance the culture of scientific inquiry by upholding integrity, reproducibility, and adherence to international publication standards.

Scope of the Journal

GJMHS publishes a broad range of scholarly contributions, including:

Original Research Articles
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Narrative Reviews
Case Reports and Case Series (with strict ethical compliance)
Short Communications
Clinical Practice Updates
Policy and Public Health Analyses
Methodological Papers
Educational and Training Research
Health Systems and Community Health Studies

Disciplines Covered

The journal welcomes submissions from (but not limited to):

Clinical Medicine
Surgery and Surgical Specialties
Rehabilitation Sciences
Orthopedics and Neuromuscular Sciences
Nursing and Midwifery
Allied Health Sciences
Physiotherapy and Sports Medicine
Diagnostic and Imaging Sciences
Public Health, Community Medicine, and Epidemiology
Medical Education and Simulation
Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Health Policy, Health Systems, and Management
Biomedical Sciences

By supporting a multidisciplinary approach, GJMHS fosters collaboration between clinicians, researchers, academicians, scientists, and public health professionals.

Frequency of the Journal

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) follows a biannual publication frequency, designed to ensure academic rigor, high editorial standards, and consistent dissemination of quality research.

The journal commenced publication on 1 January 2025. From its inception, GJMHS has adopted a structured biannual model to support thorough peer review, editorial quality control, and reliable indexing practices.

Biannual Publication Model

GJMHS publishes two issues per year, covering fixed six-month periods:

First Issue (January–June)
Second Issue (July–December)

This frequency allows the journal to:

Maintain high-quality peer review standards
Ensure careful editorial and ethical screening
Provide sufficient time for revisions and author communication
Deliver professionally copyedited and indexed publications

Publication History and Issue Structure

Volume 1 (2025)

As the inaugural year of publication, 2025 constitutes Volume 1 of GJMHS:

Volume 1, Issue 1 (January–June 2025)
Published at the end of June 2025, featuring manuscripts submitted, reviewed, and accepted during the first half of the year.
Volume 1, Issue 2 (July–December 2025)
Published at the end of December 2025, comprising manuscripts processed during the second half of the year.

Biannual Publication Timeline

Each biannual cycle follows a clearly defined and monitored workflow:

January–June Issue

Manuscript submission and review: January–May
Final acceptance and production: June
Issue publication: End of June

July–December Issue

Manuscript submission and review: July–November
Final acceptance and production: December
Issue publication: End of December

Each cycle ensures:

Adequate time for rigorous peer review
Ethical and editorial compliance checks
Professional copyediting and layout
DOI assignment and metadata indexing
Timely online availability of published articles

Editorial Workflow and Timeliness

The publication schedule of GJMHS is supported by:

Continuous editorial screening within defined timelines
Standardized peer review periods, typically 3–4 weeks per review cycle
Structured revision timelines based on the level of revision required
Post-acceptance processing, including proofreading, typesetting, metadata preparation, and DOI registration

Commitment to Transparency and Timely Dissemination

GJMHS is committed to:

Publishing each issue according to the announced schedule
Avoiding backlog accumulation
Transparently communicating any unavoidable delays
Making all accepted articles available online promptly upon completion of production

This biannual publication model ensures steady, reliable access to scientifically sound research while maintaining alignment with international scholarly publishing standards

Peer Review Policy & Process

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) maintains a rigorous, transparent, and ethically grounded peer-review system that upholds the highest global standards of scientific publishing. The journal’s peer-review policy is designed to ensure that all published research is methodologically sound, ethically responsible, scientifically significant, and free from bias. Our policy aligns with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the Council of Science Editors (CSE).

Peer review is central to maintaining the integrity and quality of scientific communication. Therefore, GJMHS employs a double-blind peer-review model, ensuring complete anonymity between authors and reviewers to eliminate conscious or unconscious bias. This practice enhances fairness, objectivity, and trust in the scholarly evaluation process.

Objectives of the Peer Review System

The GJMHS peer-review structure is designed to:

Ensure Scientific Rigor:
Verify methodological accuracy, internal consistency, validity of results, and completeness of reporting.
Guarantee Ethical Integrity:
Confirm that the study follows international ethical guidelines, including proper informed consent, ethical approval, and privacy protections.
Maintain Originality and Novelty:
Assess the uniqueness of the research, its contribution to current scientific knowledge, and its relevance to advancing medical and health sciences.
Improve Manuscript Quality:
Provide constructive, detailed feedback that enables authors to refine, strengthen, and clarify their research.
Ensure Editorial Transparency:
Uphold fairness and impartiality in editorial decision-making based on academic merit and alignment with journal scope.
Support Reproducibility:
Evaluate whether the findings can be replicated based on methodological transparency and completeness of data reporting.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

The GJMHS editorial workflow includes multiple quality-assurance layers to evaluate manuscripts from submission to publication.

Stage 1: Submission and Initial Screening

Upon submission through the Online Journal System (OJS), the manuscript undergoes a preliminary editorial check performed by the Managing Editor.

This initial evaluation assesses:

Relevance to the journal’s scope
Completeness of submission requirements
Compliance with formatting guidelines
Plagiarism level (Turnitin similarity report)
Ethical approval documentation
Scientific soundness of the abstract and title
Technical quality of tables, figures, and references

Outcomes of Initial Screening:

Proceed to Peer Review
Request for Technical Revision
Desk Rejection (if the paper falls outside the scope or lacks scientific merit)

Desk rejections are communicated within 5–7 working days, ensuring authors receive timely decisions.

Stage 2: Assignment to Handling Editor

The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to an Associate or Subject Editor based on:

Expertise in the study area
Academic qualifications
Prior editorial and reviewing experience
Absence of conflicts of interest

The Handling Editor oversees the entire peer-review process and is responsible for reviewer selection, decision-making, and communication with authors.

Stage 3: Ethical and Technical Compliance Check

The Ethics Editor conducts a detailed review of:

IRB/ethical approval
Informed consent (where applicable)
Human subjects compliance (Declaration of Helsinki)
Transparency declarations
Funding and conflict-of-interest disclosures
Trial registration (if applicable)
Plagiarism, duplicate publication, or image manipulation

Manuscripts with ethical issues are returned to authors with mandatory corrections.

Stage 4: Double-Blind Peer Review

Each manuscript is sent to two independent reviewers, selected for their expertise, credentials, publications, and experience.

Reviewer Selection Criteria:

Subject specialization
Minimum qualification: postgraduate or doctoral degree
Prior peer-review experience
Absence of conflict of interest
Demonstrated academic neutrality
Strong publication track record

Reviewer Responsibilities:

Maintain confidentiality
Provide objective and constructive feedback
Evaluate scientific accuracy
Identify ethical issues
Detect methodological weaknesses or statistical flaws
Assess novelty and relevance
Recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection

Review Timeline:

Reviewers are given 3–4 weeks to complete the review.
Extensions may be granted on request to ensure quality.

If reviewers disagree:

A third expert reviewer is assigned to provide an independent opinion.

Stage 5: Editorial Decision

The Handling Editor synthesizes reviewer comments and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief:

Accept
Minor Revisions Required
Major Revisions Required
Reject

The Editor-in-Chief then issues the final decision.

Stage 6: Revision and Response to Reviewers

Authors must:

Address each reviewer comment point-by-point
Submit a clean revised manuscript
Provide a tracked-changes version
Provide a detailed response letter

Deadlines:

Minor revision: 7–14 days
Major revision: 21–45 days

Manuscripts with poor or incomplete responses may be rejected.

Stage 7: Second Round of Review (If Necessary)

Revised manuscripts requiring complex changes may undergo re-review by:

One or both original reviewers
A new reviewer in case of conflict, unavailability, or special circumstances

Stage 8: Final Acceptance

The Editor-in-Chief issues the acceptance after confirming that:

All reviewer concerns are adequately addressed
Ethical and technical compliance is satisfactory
Manuscript meets journal standards

DOI assignment, metadata preparation, and pre-publication checks follow.

Stage 9: Copyediting, Typesetting & Proofing

The accepted manuscript undergoes:

Professional language editing
Grammar and syntax corrections
Reference cross-checking
Figure and table optimization
Formatting as per journal standards
Final author proof review

Authors must approve final proofs within 48–72 hours.

Stage 10: Online Publication

The final version of the manuscript is published:

As Online First immediately
Compiled into the scheduled monthly or biannual issue
Indexed across partnered indexing services
Archived with LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, and other systems

Standard Reviewer’s Guidelines

GJMHS provides a clear, structured, and internationally aligned guideline for reviewers to ensure consistency, fairness, and scientific rigor in manuscript evaluation.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must:

Keep manuscripts confidential
Not share data, ideas, or results
Not discuss manuscripts with colleagues
Destroy manuscript files after completing the review

Objectivity and Impartiality

Reviewers must:

Evaluate manuscripts solely on scientific merit
Avoid personal criticism
Identify conflicts of interest (e.g., affiliations, collaborations, financial ties)
Decline review if they cannot be objective

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on:

Scientific Quality

Validity and reliability of results
Appropriateness of methodology
Accuracy of data interpretation
Clarity of hypotheses, objectives, and outcomes
Strength of statistical analyses

Originality and Novelty

Contribution to scientific knowledge
Relevance of findings
Innovation in approach or methodology

Structural Quality

Coherence of the introduction
Clarity in methods and replicability
Logical flow of results
Depth of discussion
Conclusion supported by data

Ethical Considerations

IRB approval
Informed consent documentation
Protection of patient identity
Ethical handling of biological or sensitive data

Writing Quality

Grammar and clarity
Logical organization
Standardized reporting (CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE, etc.)
Correct referencing style

Recommendations Reviewers May Give

Accept as is
Minor revisions needed
Major revisions required
Reject

Reviewers provide a justification for each recommendation.

Prohibited Reviewer Behaviors

Using manuscript ideas for personal research
Delaying reviews for competitive advantage
Requesting authors to cite reviewer’s own work unnecessarily
Sharing confidential content
Exhibiting bias based on gender, nationality, institution, or personal beliefs

Originality and Plagiarism Policy

GJMHS maintains zero tolerance toward plagiarism, duplication, falsification, fabricated data, image manipulation, or unethical authorship practices. The journal complies with COPE, ICMJE, and HEC Pakistan plagiarism policies.

Plagiarism Screening

Every manuscript undergoes:

Turnitin similarity check
Image forensics (if applicable)
Citation accuracy check

Similarity Thresholds

≤20% similarity: acceptable with proper citations
>20% similarity: returned for correction
>30% similarity or detected patchwork plagiarism: desk rejection

Forms of Plagiarism

Direct copying
Self-plagiarism
Mosaic/patchwork plagiarism
Data plagiarism
Image duplication
Improper paraphrasing
Failure to cite original sources

Consequences of Plagiarism

Depending on severity:

Manuscript rejection
Blacklisting authors
Retraction of published article
Notification to institutions
Ban on future submissions

Subscription Details

GJMHS is a fully open-access journal, promoting free and unrestricted access to scientific knowledge.

Key Principles:

No subscription fee
No access fee
No paywalls
No institutional login required
Global access to full text

Accessibility:

All articles are available:

On the journal website
In PDF, HTML, and XML formats
Through open-access repositories
Through indexing platforms

Benefits for Readers:

Worldwide availability
Access to high-quality research
No financial barriers
Use permitted under CC BY licensing

JOURNAL OPERATIONS

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) operates under a governance and editorial structure built upon the core principles of scientific rigor, transparency, integrity, editorial independence, and ethical accountability. The journal’s operational framework ensures smooth coordination of editorial workflows, peer-review processes, publication timelines, indexing, archiving, digital content management, and compliance with global scholarly standards.

GJMHS is committed to maintaining an operational ecosystem that supports high-quality publishing, fosters international collaboration, adheres to ethical norms, and provides authors, reviewers, editors, and readers with a professional and reliable research dissemination platform.

1.1 Governance Structure

The journal operates under the oversight of:

Editorial Board

Consisting of:

Editor-in-Chief
Associate Editors
Section Editors
Ethics Editor
Publishing Editor
Statistical/Methodological Editor
Copyediting & Production Team

Each member is selected based on academic excellence, research contribution, editorial experience, and adherence to ethical guidelines.

Advisory Board

A distinguished panel of national and international experts guiding:

Strategic direction
Editorial quality enhancement
Scientific rigor
Policy development

Publisher Oversight

The Ghurki Trust Teaching Hospital (GTTH) serves as the journal’s publisher, ensuring long-term support, infrastructure, and compliance with legal and professional standards.

1.2 Editorial Independence

The journal strictly adheres to WAME (World Association of Medical Editors) and COPE recommendations for editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based solely on:

Scientific merit
Research quality
Ethical integrity
Relevance to journal scope

No external party—including sponsors, institutional authorities, advertisers, or funding agencies—may influence editorial decisions.

1.3 Manuscript Life Cycle Management

GJMHS maintains a transparent and accountable workflow from submission to publication:

Submission through OJS
Pre-editorial screening (quality, scope, ethics, plagiarism)
Handling Editor assignment
Double-blind peer review
Editorial decision based on reviews
Revision and quality improvement
Technical editing, formatting, and metadata tagging
DOI assignment and digital archiving
Publication in scheduled issue
Indexing and repository submission

Each step is time-tracked to maintain journal efficiency and transparency in publishing.

1.4 Digital Infrastructure

The journal operates through:

OJS (Open Journal Systems) for submissions, peer review, decision tracking
CrossRef DOI allocation
Turnitin for plagiarism checks
LOCKSS and CLOCKSS for long-term archiving
OpenAlex, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Semantic Scholar, and other indexing partners

This ensures:

Content discoverability
Citation traceability
Research preservation
Secure and transparent academic communication

1.5 Transparency of Operations

To meet global ethical publishing standards, GJMHS publicly shares its policies on:

Peer review
Editorial roles
Open access
Editorial ethics
Data sharing
Copyright and licensing
Conflicts of interest
Retractions/corrections
Author responsibilities

This ensures authors and readers understand the journal’s scholarly expectations and operational rigor.

1.6 Commitment to Quality Improvement

The journal conducts periodic evaluations of:

Reviewer performance
Editor workload
Plagiarism trends
Publication timelines
Citation metrics
International visibility

This self-audit culture promotes continuous quality enhancement and strengthens scientific integrity.

ETHICS STATEMENT

Ethical Consent & Guidelines, Malpractice Statement

GJMHS is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in medical and health sciences publishing. Our ethics policies strictly follow:

COPE Core Practices
ICMJE Recommendations (2024)
WAME Editorial Policies
CARE, CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE reporting guidelines
Declaration of Helsinki for human research
Universal bioethics principles

These frameworks guide all aspects of publication, from authorship to peer review, data integrity, and editorial decision-making.

2.1 Ethical Requirements for Authors

Authors must ensure:

Originality & Integrity

Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere.
All data must be truthful, verifiable, and free from fabrication or falsification.

Ethical Approval for Human Research

All studies involving human participants must include:

IRB/ERB approval number and institution name
Confirmation of compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki
Approval for vulnerable populations (children, pregnant women, disabled individuals, etc.)

Informed Consent

Written informed consent for identifiable data, images, or case details
Guardian consent for minors or cognitively impaired individuals
Explicit documentation in the manuscript’s ethics statement

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials must include:

Trial registration number
Compliance with ICMJE trial registration requirements

2.2 Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must uphold:

Editorial Impartiality

Decisions based solely on scientific quality and ethical compliance — not:

Nationality
Religious affiliation
Institutional background
Author seniority
Political views
Funding sources

Confidentiality

Editors must:

Protect manuscript confidentiality
Not use unpublished data for personal gain
Declare conflicts of interest

Handling Misconduct

Editors must initiate investigations when evidence suggests:

Fabricated data
Image manipulation
Plagiarism
Duplicate publication
Unethical research on humans

2.3 Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must ensure:

Confidentiality

Manuscripts cannot be shared, copied, or used for personal research
All content must be deleted after the review

Objectivity

Reviews should be:

Professional
Constructive
Free from hostility, bias, or inappropriate personal comments

Integrity

Reviewers must disclose:

Conflicts of interest
Inability to review
Any ethical concerns or data inconsistencies

2.4 Malpractice Statement

Research misconduct or unethical publication behavior is taken extremely seriously. The journal’s approach is aligned with COPE’s misconduct procedures.

Types of Misconduct

Fabrication of data
Falsification or manipulation of figures
Plagiarism or self-plagiarism
Redundant or duplicate publication
Unethical experiments
Breach of participant confidentiality
Unapproved use of images
Improper authorship practices

Procedures for Handling Misconduct

Initial internal investigation
Request for explanation from authors
Consultation with COPE flowcharts
Decision: correction, retraction, expression of concern, or rejection
Communication with author institution (if required)
Long-term submission ban (in severe cases)

Outcomes

Misconduct may result in:

Immediate manuscript rejection
Retraction from published issues
Notification to author’s institution
Permanent prohibition from future submissions

PRIVACY STATEMENT

GJMHS respects the privacy, confidentiality, and personal data rights of authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. The journal complies with:

International Data Protection and Privacy Standards
GDPR principles (where applicable)
Best practices recommended by COPE & WAME

The privacy policy ensures that all personal data is handled responsibly, securely, and only for scholarly purposes.

3.1 Data We Collect

From authors:

Name, designation, institution
Email addresses and phone numbers
ORCID ID
Submission files and metadata
Conflict-of-interest statements

From reviewers:

Contact information
Areas of expertise
Review history

From readers:

Website analytics (non-identifiable)

3.2 Purpose of Data Collection

Personal data is used strictly for:

Manuscript submission processing
Assigning reviewers
Editorial communication
Publishing and indexing metadata
Maintaining academic integrity
Enhancing journal functionality

No personal data is shared with third parties except those necessary for legitimate scholarly operations (e.g., CrossRef for DOI registration).

3.3 Data Protection Measures

The journal ensures:

Secure servers and encrypted systems
Password-protected editorial accounts
Restricted access (editors only)
No unauthorized third-party sharing
Periodic system audits

3.4 Rights of Authors and Reviewers

Individuals may request:

Access to personal data
Correction of inaccurate information
Deletion of data (post-publication restrictions apply)
Withdrawal of consent (where possible)

Requests are processed within 10–15 working days.

3.5 Privacy in Peer Review

Reviewer identities remain confidential
Author names are hidden from reviewers
Manuscripts are securely transmitted and stored

3.6 Changes to Privacy Policy

The journal may update its privacy policy periodically. Any changes will be communicated through the journal website.

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

GJMHS follows a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) open-access model to promote the unrestricted distribution of scientific knowledge.

4.1 Copyright Ownership

Authors retain full copyright of their manuscripts.
The journal receives a non-exclusive license to publish, archive, distribute, and index the work.
Authors may share, archive, or reuse their work freely, provided proper citation is given.

4.2 Licensing Terms (CC BY 4.0)

This license permits:

Sharing (copying and redistributing the material)
Adapting (remixing, transforming, building upon the material)
Commercial and non-commercial use

As long as proper attribution is provided.

Attribution Requirements

Users must:

Cite the article
Credit the authors
Provide a link to the license
Indicate if changes were made

4.3 Author Warranties

Authors submitting manuscripts must guarantee:

Originality of content
No infringement of third-party rights
Permission obtained for copyrighted images/data
Compliance with ethical guidelines
No libelous or unlawful statements

4.4 Post-Publication Rights

Authors may:

Upload final published PDF to institutional repositories
Share on ResearchGate, Academia.edu, personal websites
Deposit in any archive without embargo

4.5 Copyright Violations

Violations include:

Unauthorized reproduction without attribution
Manipulation of published content
Misuse of figures, tables, or images

The journal may pursue:

Retraction
Legal notice
Removal from indexing repositories
Formal reporting to institutions

4.6 Publisher Rights

The publisher may:

Maintain permanent digital archives
Reproduce the article for indexing
Use article metadata for indexing and abstracting services
Promote the article on website and social channels

DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

1.1 Introduction

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) is firmly committed to maintaining the highest levels of transparency, research integrity, and ethical publication practices. Disclosure of conflicts of interest (COIs) is essential for sustaining trust in scholarly communication. To ensure fairness, objectivity, and scientific rigor, GJMHS follows the ICMJE Recommendations (2024) and COPE Core Practices on financial and non-financial COIs.

A conflict of interest exists whenever the personal, professional, or financial interests of any participant in the publication process (authors, reviewers, editors, contributors, or advisory members) could potentially influence, or appear to influence, their objectivity, judgment, or actions.

This policy outlines the journal’s expectations, disclosure procedures, and mechanisms to prevent, identify, and manage conflicts during all stages of manuscript submission, peer review, editorial decision-making, and publication.

1.2 Principles of Transparency

GJMHS operates on three foundational principles regarding COI:

Transparency

All stakeholders must openly declare any interest that may affect research, review, or editorial actions.

Accountability

Authors, reviewers, and editors must take personal responsibility for disclosing conflicts.

Integrity

Undisclosed conflicts—whether intentional or unintentional—undermine scientific credibility and may lead to sanctions, including manuscript rejection, corrections, or retraction.

1.3 Types of Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts may be financial, professional, or personal. GJMHS requires disclosure of all relevant interests from the preceding three years.

Financial Conflicts of Interest

Include, but are not limited to:

Direct funding or grants related to the submitted work
Consultancy fees
Paid lectures or honoraria
Stock ownership or equity interest
Patents (granted or pending)
Sponsored travel or accommodations
Employment or financial association with relevant organizations

Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest

Include:

Personal relationships or disputes
Academic competition
Institutional affiliations
Intellectual or philosophical beliefs
Membership in advocacy groups
Editorial board roles in overlapping journals

Institutional Conflicts

When the author’s institution has a financial or reputational stake in the research.

1.4 Disclosure Requirements for Authors

Authors must:

Declare all potential conflicts during manuscript submission via the COI section of the online submission system.
Include a COI statement within the manuscript (before references).
Provide transparency regarding funding sources, including the role of sponsors in:

Study design
Data collection
Analysis
Manuscript preparation
Decision to publish

State explicitly when no conflict exists using the phrase:
“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

Failure to disclose a conflict—whether intentional or accidental—may result in:

Rejection of manuscript
Publication of correction notice
Retraction
Notification to institutional authorities

1.5 Disclosure Requirements for Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Decline review if a COI exists
Disclose conflicts to the editor immediately
Refrain from reviewing if personal, financial, or academic interests may bias assessment

Examples:

Reviewing work of close collaborators
Competitive research overlap
Financial ties to the topic

If a COI is detected after review, the review will be discarded and reassigned.

1.6 Disclosure Requirements for Editors

Editors:

Must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists
Are prohibited from making decisions on papers authored by their students, colleagues, or collaborators
Must disclose conflicts publicly in published articles where relevant
Must not use unpublished data from manuscripts for personal research

If the Editor-in-Chief has a conflict:

Associate Editor or an independent guest editor handles the manuscript.

1.7 Management of Conflicts of Interest

The Editorial Office enforces the following procedures:

Review of all COI declarations
Transparent reporting on published manuscripts
In cases of suspected undisclosed COIs, inquiry following COPE flowcharts
Decisions made on a case-by-case basis, prioritizing scientific integrity

Conflicts do not automatically disqualify a manuscript if properly disclosed. Lack of disclosure, however, is treated as misconduct.

CORRECTION AND RETRACTION OF RESEARCH ARTICLES

2.1 Introduction

Scientific publishing must maintain the integrity of the academic record. GJMHS adheres to COPE Retraction Guidelines, CrossMark policies, and best practices for scholarly correction systems.

Accuracy is essential. When errors, ethical issues, or misconduct are discovered—either before or after publication—GJMHS takes appropriate action to:

Correct the scholarly record
Notify readers
Preserve transparency
Uphold reliability of scientific literature

Actions include:

Editorial corrections
Expressions of concern
Retractions
Withdrawal of articles accepted but not published

2.2 Principles for Corrections and Retractions

GJMHS follows four essential principles:

Accuracy

All corrections or retractions must precisely reflect the issue found.

Transparency

Notices must clearly explain the reason for the action.

Permanence

Corrections and retractions remain permanently available.

Integrity

Rectifications are executed without personal bias, institutional pressure, or political influence.

2.3 Types of Post-Publication Corrections

Erratum (Publisher Error)

Issued when errors occurred during:

Typesetting
Formatting
Figure/table processing
Author metadata entry

These do not affect the scientific validity of the article.

Corrigendum (Author Error)

Issued when authors request correction of errors such as:

Incorrect data labels
Minor statistical mistakes
Affiliation errors
Mislabeling of tables or graphs
Misspelled names

These errors must not alter the study’s results or conclusions.

Addendum

Issued when additional important information was unavailable during the original publication.

2.4 Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when:

Investigations of misconduct are ongoing
Evidence is inconclusive
Ethical concerns arise
Authorship disputes remain unresolved
Data inconsistencies need further inquiry

This alerts readers without prematurely retracting the article.

2.5 Retraction Policy

A retraction is issued for:

Scientific Misconduct

Fabrication or falsification of data
Image manipulation
Plagiarism
Redundant publication
Fake peer reviews
Intentional misrepresentation

Ethical Violations

Unapproved human research
Use of identifiable patient information without consent
IRB/ethical approval fraud

Serious Errors

Major methodological flaws
Incorrect conclusions due to computational or analytical errors
Unreliable data affecting study validity

Legal Concerns

Libelous, defamatory, or copyrighted material without permission

2.6 Retraction Procedure

Receipt of allegation or discovery of problem
Initial assessment by editorial office
Consultation with COPE guidelines
Formal correspondence with authors
Request for raw data, ethics approvals, or clarifications
Institutional involvement when necessary
Decision by Editor-in-Chief
Publication of retraction notice
Watermarking of original article as “Retracted”

Retraction notices must:

Be freely accessible
Be linked to the original article
State clear reasons
Avoid defamatory language
Follow CrossMark version-control standards

2.7 Removal of Published Content

Articles may be removed only when:

Legal orders mandate removal
Publication poses serious public health risks
Content violates participant confidentiality in irreversible ways

In such extreme cases:

Metadata will remain online
Notice explaining removal will replace the article

2.8 Post-Retraction Author Sanctions

Depending on severity, authors may face:

Temporary submission bans (6–36 months)
Permanent ban in extreme misconduct
Reporting to their institution or funding agencies
Withdrawal of editorial or reviewer privileges

ADHERENCE TO COMMUNITY STANDARDS

3.1 Introduction

GJMHS is dedicated to upholding internationally accepted scientific, ethical, and scholarly community standards. Researchers, editors, peer reviewers, and publishers share collective responsibility in ensuring:

Scientific rigor
Professional conduct
Ethical compliance
Transparency
Respect for human participants
Fairness and inclusivity
Responsible data stewardship
Best practices in reporting

The journal aligns with the expectations of the global scientific community—including WHO, COPE, ICMJE, WAME, DOAJ, UNESCO Bioethics, and ARRIVE/CONSORT/PRISMA/CARE guidelines.

3.2 Research Integrity Standards

All research must adhere to the following:

Honesty

Data, results, methods, authorship, and references must be accurate.

Objectivity

Interpretations must be unbiased and transparent.

Accountability

Researchers must take responsibility for accuracy and ethical conduct.

Good Data Management

Includes proper storage, retention, sharing, and security of data.

3.3 Methodological and Reporting Standards

To improve reproducibility and credibility, GJMHS enforces use of internationally recognized reporting frameworks, including:

CONSORT (clinical trials)
PRISMA (systematic reviews)
STROBE (observational studies)
CARE (case reports)
ARRIVE (animal research — although GJMHS does not publish animal studies)
CHERRIES (e-surveys)
SRQR & COREQ (qualitative research)

Authors must follow the appropriate guideline for their article type and upload completed checklists during submission.

3.4 Respectful Scholarly Conduct

The journal promotes:

Inclusivity and non-discrimination

Authors must avoid:

Racial stereotypes
Gender bias
Inflammatory language
Culturally insensitive statements

Evidence-based reasoning

Claims must be supported by verifiable data.

Respect for colleagues and reviewers

Communication must remain professional at all times.

Avoidance of predatory practices

Authors must not engage in:

Fake authorship
Ghost/gift authorship
Citation manipulation

3.5 Adherence to Ethical Community Guidelines

Authors must:

Follow ethical norms for human research
Avoid political, defamatory, or discriminatory content
Ensure respectful representation of vulnerable groups
Maintain objectivity and neutrality in scientific arguments

3.6 Community Engagement and Accountability

GJMHS works to foster a fair and responsible research culture through:

Reviewer Training Programs

Educating peer reviewers on bias detection, ethical review, and methodological rigor.

Editorial Workshops

Enhancing the capacity of editors to detect misconduct, plagiarism, and manipulation.

Reader Engagement Policies

Allowing readers to submit concerns, critiques, and post-publication commentary.

Transparency Reports

Annual summaries on:

Number of submissions
Acceptance rate
Common ethical violations
Retractions and corrections

3.7 Commitment to Global Scientific Community Values

The journal pledges to:

Uphold scientific objectivity
Promote equitable access to research through open access
Encourage diverse representation in authorship
Support early-career researchers
Counter misinformation through rigorous review
Maintain neutrality on religious, social, and political matters
Ensure unbiased editorial and reviewer selection

3.8 Sanctions for Violations of Community Standards

Violations may result in:

Manuscript rejection
Corrections or retractions
Author blacklisting
Notification to funding agencies
Withdrawal of editorial or reviewer privileges

3.9 Continuous Improvement

GJMHS regularly updates its policies to:

Reflect emerging ethical concerns
Address technological shifts (AI, data science, digital research)
Respond to community feedback
Align with evolving international standards

EDITOR SELECTION POLICY, DATA SHARING POLICY, AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS)

EDITOR SELECTION POLICY

1.1 Introduction

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) recognizes that the credibility, academic rigor, and ethical integrity of a scholarly journal are fundamentally dependent on the quality, independence, and competence of its editorial leadership. Editors play a central role in safeguarding scientific standards, ensuring fairness in peer review, and upholding transparency and accountability in the publication process.

This Editor Selection Policy outlines the principles, eligibility criteria, selection procedures, responsibilities, tenure, evaluation mechanisms, and ethical expectations governing the appointment and functioning of editors at GJMHS. The policy is informed by best practices recommended by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

1.2 Editorial Independence and Governance

GJMHS strictly upholds editorial independence. Editorial decisions are made autonomously and are not influenced by the publisher, sponsors, advertisers, institutional authorities, or political entities. The publisher provides administrative and infrastructural support but does not interfere in editorial judgment.

The editorial structure includes:

Editor-in-Chief
Associate Editors
Section Editors
Ethics Editor
Statistical/Methodological Editors
Editorial Advisory Board

Each role is clearly defined to prevent concentration of authority and to ensure checks and balances.

1.3 Eligibility Criteria for Editors

Candidates for editorial roles must meet the following minimum criteria:

Academic and Professional Qualifications

A terminal academic or professional qualification (e.g., MD, PhD, FCPS, equivalent) in a relevant discipline
Active engagement in medical or health sciences research
Demonstrated publication record in peer-reviewed journals

Editorial and Research Experience

Prior experience as a reviewer, editor, or editorial board member
Familiarity with peer review systems and scholarly publishing workflows
Understanding of research ethics, reporting guidelines, and publication standards

Ethical Standing

No record of research misconduct
Willingness to adhere strictly to COPE and ICMJE ethical frameworks
Ability to manage conflicts of interest transparently

1.4 Selection Process

The editor selection process at GJMHS is transparent, merit-based, and documented.

Step 1: Call for Nominations

Nominations may be solicited internally or externally
Self-nominations are permitted with full documentation

Step 2: Submission of Credentials

Candidates must submit:

A detailed curriculum vitae
Statement of editorial interest and vision
Disclosure of conflicts of interest
Evidence of editorial or peer-review contributions

Step 3: Evaluation by Governing Body

The journal’s governing or advisory committee evaluates candidates based on:

Academic merit
Subject expertise
Editorial competence
Commitment to ethical publishing

Step 4: Appointment and Orientation

Successful candidates receive:

Formal appointment letter
Defined role description
Orientation on journal policies, workflows, and ethical standards

1.5 Roles and Responsibilities of Editors

Editors at GJMHS are responsible for:

Ensuring fair, unbiased, and timely peer review
Selecting appropriate reviewers based on expertise
Making editorial decisions based on scientific merit
Identifying ethical concerns or research misconduct
Maintaining confidentiality throughout the review process
Ensuring compliance with journal policies and reporting guidelines

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

1.6 Tenure, Performance Review, and Removal

Tenure

Editorial appointments are typically for a fixed term (e.g., 2–3 years)
Renewal is subject to performance review

Performance Evaluation

Editors are evaluated on:

Timeliness of decisions
Quality of editorial judgments
Ethical compliance
Contribution to journal development

Removal

An editor may be removed for:

Ethical misconduct
Persistent failure to perform duties
Breach of confidentiality
Undisclosed conflicts of interest

DATA SHARING POLICY

2.1 Introduction

GJMHS strongly supports data transparency, reproducibility, and responsible data stewardship as cornerstones of credible scientific research. Data sharing enhances trust in research findings, enables validation of results, promotes collaboration, and accelerates scientific advancement.

This policy aligns with recommendations from:

ICMJE
COPE
FAIR Data Principles
UNESCO Open Science Framework

2.2 Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to:

Original research articles
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Observational and interventional studies
Qualitative and mixed-methods research

2.3 Data Availability Statement

All manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement specifying:

Whether data are publicly available
Where and how the data can be accessed
Any access restrictions and their justification
Conditions under which data may be shared upon request

2.4 Types of Data Covered

The policy covers:

Raw datasets
Processed datasets
Statistical analysis files
Survey instruments
Code or algorithms (where applicable)

2.5 Recommended Repositories

Authors are encouraged to deposit data in:

Institutional repositories
Discipline-specific repositories
General repositories (e.g., Figshare, Dryad)

Datasets should be assigned persistent identifiers (e.g., DOI) wherever possible.

2.6 Ethical and Legal Considerations

GJMHS recognizes that data sharing may be limited by:

Patient confidentiality
Informed consent restrictions
Legal or regulatory requirements
Proprietary or sensitive information

In such cases:

Data must be anonymized where feasible
Restrictions must be clearly stated
Ethical approvals must support data handling decisions

2.7 Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for:

Ensuring data accuracy and integrity
Maintaining data securely
Providing access as declared
Retaining data for a reasonable period after publication

Failure to comply with declared data availability may result in editorial action.

2.8 Editorial Oversight and Compliance

Editors may:

Request clarification on data availability
Ask for supporting datasets during review
Refer cases of non-compliance for investigation

Data transparency is considered part of the overall assessment of scientific rigor.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) POLICY

3.1 Introduction

GJMHS acknowledges the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine-learning tools in research, writing, analysis, and publishing. While AI technologies offer efficiency and innovation, they also raise ethical, legal, and scholarly concerns related to authorship, originality, bias, and accountability.

This policy aligns with:

COPE Position Statement on AI (2023)
ICMJE Recommendations (2024)
International best practices on responsible AI use

3.2 Acceptable Use of AI by Authors

AI tools may be used for:

Language editing and grammar support
Improving clarity and readability
Reference management support

AI tools must not:

Generate original research data
Replace human interpretation or analysis
Be listed as authors
Be used to fabricate or manipulate results

3.3 Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must:

Disclose any use of AI tools at submission
Describe the purpose and extent of AI assistance
Retain full responsibility for content accuracy

Disclosure should be included in:

Cover letter
Manuscript (methods or acknowledgements section)

3.4 AI and Authorship

AI systems cannot qualify as authors because they:

Cannot take responsibility
Cannot provide consent
Cannot be accountable for ethical compliance

All accountability rests with human authors.

3.5 Use of AI in Peer Review

Reviewers:

May not upload manuscripts to AI tools without permission
Must maintain confidentiality
Must disclose any AI assistance used in review

Editors may prohibit AI use in review if confidentiality is compromised.

3.6 Detection of AI-Generated Content

The journal reserves the right to:

Use AI-detection or forensic tools
Request clarification from authors
Reject manuscripts with undisclosed or inappropriate AI use

3.7 Ethical Concerns and Bias

AI systems may introduce:

Bias
Inaccuracies
Hallucinated content

Authors and editors must exercise critical oversight and ensure compliance with scientific and ethical standards.

3.8 Future Policy Development

GJMHS recognizes that AI technology is rapidly evolving. This policy will be:

Periodically reviewed
Updated in line with international guidance
Communicated transparently to stakeholders

CONCLUSION

Through these policies, the Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences demonstrates its commitment to:

Robust editorial governance
Transparent and responsible data practices
Ethical and accountable use of emerging technologies

These frameworks strengthen the journal’s scientific credibility, protect the integrity of the scholarly record, and align GJMHS with leading international standards in medical and health sciences publishing.

GRANT SUPPORT

Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS)

GRANT SUPPORT

1.1 Introduction

The Ghurki Journal of Medical and Health Sciences (GJMHS) recognizes that research funding and grant support play a vital role in advancing scientific knowledge, enabling high-quality study design, supporting data collection and analysis, and facilitating dissemination of impactful findings. At the same time, transparent reporting of grant support is essential to preserve scientific integrity, editorial independence, and public trust in published research.

GJMHS is committed to full transparency regarding all forms of financial and non-financial support associated with submitted and published research. This policy is guided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations, Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) best practices, and global standards for responsible research funding disclosure.

1.2 Scope of the Grant Support Policy

This policy applies to all submissions to GJMHS, including but not limited to:

Original research articles
Clinical and observational studies
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Public health and community-based research
Methodological and educational studies

The policy covers all sources of support, whether direct or indirect, financial or in-kind.

1.3 Definition of Grant Support

Grant support refers to any financial, material, logistical, or institutional assistance that contributed to the conduct of the research or preparation of the manuscript. This includes:

Research grants from government agencies
Institutional or university research funding
Support from hospitals or research centers
Funding from non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
Philanthropic foundations
Industry or commercial sponsorship
In-kind contributions such as equipment, software, laboratory access, or personnel support

1.4 Disclosure Requirements for Authors

All authors submitting manuscripts to GJMHS must clearly disclose grant support information at the time of submission.

Mandatory Disclosure Elements

Authors must state:

Name of the funding organization(s)
Grant number(s), where applicable
Type of support provided
Role of the funder in:

Study design
Data collection
Data analysis
Manuscript preparation
Decision to submit or publish

If no grant or external funding was received, authors must explicitly state:

“This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”

1.5 Placement of Grant Support Information

Grant support information must be included:

In the Funding Statement section of the manuscript
In the submission metadata during online submission
Where relevant, in the Conflict of Interest declaration

This ensures transparency for reviewers, editors, and readers.

1.6 Role of Funders and Editorial Independence

GJMHS strictly maintains editorial independence regardless of funding source.

Funders must not:

Influence editorial decisions
Control data interpretation
Restrict access to study findings
Interfere with peer review

Authors must confirm that:

They had full access to all data
They retain responsibility for data accuracy and interpretation
The decision to publish was independent of funder influence

Any attempt by a funding body to influence editorial decisions will result in rejection of the manuscript and possible notification to relevant authorities.

1.7 Industry-Sponsored Research

GJMHS accepts industry-funded research provided that:

Full disclosure of sponsorship is made
Ethical approvals are clearly documented
Data integrity and methodological rigor are demonstrated
The role of the sponsor is transparently stated

Industry sponsorship alone does not disqualify a manuscript; however, undisclosed sponsorship or manipulation of outcomes constitutes serious ethical misconduct.

1.8 Verification and Editorial Oversight

Editors may:

Request additional clarification regarding funding
Ask for grant documentation if inconsistencies arise
Evaluate whether funding introduces potential bias

Failure to disclose grant support accurately may lead to:

Rejection prior to publication
Correction or retraction after publication
Notification to the author’s institution or funding body

1.9 Grant Acknowledgement and Indexing

Accurate grant disclosure supports:

Indexing in international databases
Compliance with funder open-access mandates
Long-term transparency in the scholarly record

GJMHS ensures that grant information is preserved in article metadata and remains permanently accessible.

1.10 Commitment to Ethical Research Funding

GJMHS encourages:

Ethical grant acquisition
Responsible use of research funds
Research addressing public health priorities
Equitable access to funding for early-career researchers

By promoting transparent grant disclosure, GJMHS strengthens trust in medical and health sciences research and aligns with global open science principles.

Publication Policies

1

Latest publications

Information