Integrity in Research and Publishing

Authors submitting to Health Empirics must present original, accurate, and unbiased research findings. The journal prohibits plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification in any form. All sources and contributions must receive proper acknowledgment, ensuring transparency and accountability throughout the publication process.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship designation should reflect substantial contributions to the study design, execution, analysis, or manuscript preparation. All individuals listed as authors must have participated meaningfully in the work and must provide final approval of the manuscript prior to submission. Contributors who do not meet full authorship criteria should be acknowledged separately.

Ethical Approval for Research

Research involving human participants must adhere to established ethical standards, including obtaining informed consent and securing approval from relevant ethics committees or Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). Authors must clearly disclose any potential ethical concerns or conflicts of interest related to their research methodology, participants, or findings.

Peer Review Process

All submissions to Health Empirics undergo comprehensive desk review followed by rigorous peer evaluation to ensure scientific validity, methodological soundness, and relevance to the field. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality during the evaluation process and must recuse themselves if conflicts of interest arise.

Transparency in Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could potentially influence their work or decision-making. Full transparency regarding funding sources, affiliations, and competing interests is essential to maintaining the integrity of published research.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Health Empirics encourages authors to share raw data, detailed methodologies, and analytical approaches to enhance transparency and enable reproducibility of research findings. Any restrictions on data availability must be clearly justified and explained within the manuscript.

Handling Misconduct

Allegations of research or publication misconduct including plagiarism, unethical research practices, or data manipulation will be thoroughly investigated by the editorial team. Substantiated cases may result in manuscript rejection, published retractions, or referral to institutional authorities as appropriate.

Respect for Intellectual Property Rights

Authors must ensure that submitted content respects intellectual property rights and complies with copyright laws. Materials reproduced from other sources must include proper permissions and citations in accordance with scholarly conventions.

Timely Communication of Decisions

The journal is committed to efficient manuscript processing, providing desk review decisions within one week of submission and peer review determinations within six weeks when possible. Authors will receive regular updates regarding the status of their submissions.

Appeals and Complaints

While desk review decisions are final and may not include detailed explanations for rejection, authors may appeal peer-review decisions if they believe procedural errors or reviewer misunderstandings have occurred during the evaluation process.

Conflict of Interest (COI)

All authors, reviewers, and editors must declare any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that might influence their work or judgment, in accordance with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) guidelines.

Health Empirics maintains strict editorial independence, ensuring that publication decisions remain free from commercial or political interference, as recommended by WAME.

Redundant Publication

Submissions must not substantially overlap with previously published work (defined as more than 10% similarity) unless properly justified and referenced, following the Frontiers publication model.

Manuscripts previously posted as preprints are acceptable for consideration, provided that preprint status is disclosed during the submission process, aligning with ICMJE recommendations.

Post-Publication Corrections

Health Empirics follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for handling errors and misconduct :

• Minor errors are addressed through published correction notices
• Major flaws or confirmed misconduct cases result in full retraction with detailed explanation

Whistleblower Protection

The journal guarantees confidentiality for individuals reporting potential misconduct throughout the investigation process.

Inclusivity and Accessibility

Editorial decisions prioritize scientific merit and scholarly contribution over authors' nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or geographic location, in accordance with WAME principles.

Open Access

Health Empirics complies with Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) standards for archiving practices and licensing transparency, ensuring broad accessibility of published content.

Clinical Trials Reporting

Clinical trials must be preregistered in World Health Organization (WHO)-approved platforms such as ClinicalTrials.gov, as stipulated by ICMJE requirements.

Randomized controlled trials must adhere to the 25-item CONSORT checklist to ensure comprehensive reporting of trial design, execution, and findings.

Authors and Authors' Responsibilities

Authorship designation should be based on substantial contributions to the research and manuscript preparation, including:

• Significant Contribution : Active participation in study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation
• Manuscript Development : Drafting or critically revising intellectual content
• Approval : Final review and approval of the version to be published
• Accountability : Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring accuracy and integrity

Individuals who contributed but do not meet full authorship criteria should be acknowledged in a separate section.

• Authors must submit original work not previously published in other journals
• Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism and duplicate publication, is prohibited
• All submissions undergo systematic screening using plagiarism detection software

• Research involving human participants or animals must have documented approval from appropriate ethics committees
• Authors must demonstrate adherence to CONSORT guidelines for clinical trials
• Trial registration in WHO-approved repositories is mandatory for clinical research

Authors must comprehensively disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could potentially influence their research findings, methodology, or interpretations. Transparency in conflicts of interest is fundamental to the integrity of published work.

• Authors should provide access to raw data, methodologies, and supplementary materials when possible
• Restrictions on data sharing must be clearly explained and justified
• Data repositories should be referenced when applicable

Authors bear responsibility for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of their research findings and must cooperate with editors regarding any post-publication inquiries, corrections, or concerns that may arise.

• Manuscripts should not substantially overlap with previously published work unless properly referenced
• Secondary analyses must be clearly identified and justified
• Preprint submission must be disclosed during the journal submission process

All individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet authorship criteria should receive appropriate acknowledgment in a dedicated section of the manuscript.

Authors must disclose any artificial intelligence tools used in research design, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. The ultimate responsibility for content accuracy and integrity remains with the human authors.

• Authors must confirm their manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere
• Prompt responses to editorial queries during review and revision are expected
• Withdrawal requests must follow established journal protocols

Review Process

• Submission Screening : All manuscripts undergo initial evaluation for adherence to journal guidelines, originality, relevance, and quality
• Plagiarism Check : Automated plagiarism detection ensures originality of submissions
• Desk Review Decision :
  • Manuscripts meeting quality thresholds advance to peer review
  • Submissions failing to meet criteria receive desk rejection without detailed explanation
  • Desk review outcomes are typically communicated within one week

• Double-Blind Peer Review : Health Empirics employs double-blind review whereauthor and reviewer identities remain confidential
• Reviewer Selection : Experts are chosen based on subject matter expertise andabsence of conflicts
• Reviewer Responsibilities:
  • Provide constructive assessment of methodology, results, and relevance
  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the evaluation process
  • Disclose potential conflicts of interest affecting impartiality

The journal strives to complete the peer review process within six weeks from submission. Authorsreceive regular updates regarding manuscript status throughout this period.

Each manuscript receives evaluation from at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers may provideconfidential comments to the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor to ensure comprehensive andunbiased assessment.

Following peer review, the editorial team renders one of the following decisions:

• Accept : Manuscript approved as submitted or with minor adjustments
• Minor Revisions : Specific modifications required before acceptance
• Major Revisions : Substantial changes needed with resubmission for further evaluation
• Reject : Manuscript deemed unsuitable for publication based on reviewer feedback

• Authors must address reviewer comments systematically with point-by-point responses
• Revisions should be completed within the specified timeframe (typically 2-4 weeks)
• Revised manuscripts undergo re-evaluation by original reviewers or editors

The first review round typically requires between one and six months. Authors should retain theirarticle files, as the journal will not provide them during the revision process.

Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting and formatting prior to publication. Authors receiveproofs for final approval before official publication.

Authors may contest editorial decisions if they believe procedural errors occurred during evaluation.Appeals require written submission with detailed justification and undergo independent panel review.

Rejected or withdrawn articles are removed from the journal's system, allowing authors to pursuepublication elsewhere. The journal does not retain or provide article files to authors after rejection.

Health Empirics maintains this comprehensive review process to ensure publications meet the highest standards of scientific rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to health research and practice.

Authors, reviewers, and editorial board members must disclose any affiliations orcircumstances that could influence the objectivity of the review and publication process.

The publisher has an established plan for electronic backup and long-term preservation ofjournal content to ensure continued access in the event of journal discontinuation.

Indian Health Economics and Policy Association, India

This document is prepared with reference to the guidelines from the following esteemedorganisations:

1. Elsevier PERK
2. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
3. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
4. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
5. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)