Policy Document

Policy Document

Riphah Journal of Allied Health Sciences (RJAHS)

 

• RJAHS Publisher and Editorial Freedom Policy:
• Open Access Copyrights/licensed Policy:
• Author fees or charges:
• RJAHS Publication Ethics and Misconduct Policy:
• RJAHS Advertising policy:
• RJAHS Archiving Policy:
• RJAHS Article Correction-Appeal-withdrawal policy:
• RJAHS Peer Review Policy:
• RJAHS Sponsor & Partnership policy:
• Language of RJAHS content and What Editor Wants:

"Faculty of Rehabilitation & Allied health sciences, Riphah International University" Gulberg campus Lahore, is the publisher of the Riphah Journal of Allied Health Sciences (RJAHS).  

The majority of reputable research scientists and physicians have joined the RJAHS Board of Trustees. We have committed to the Board of Trustees that we will uphold the RJAHS 's policy of unrestricted open access to research articles, and that any future owner, editor, or managing editor will also be required to pledge to carry out this policy.

 

The Board of trustees have the right to administer these undertakings.

• Hassan Muhammad Khan, Chancellor, Riphah International University, Pakistan
• Dr. Anis Ahmad, Vice Chancellor, Riphah International University, Pakistan
• Dr. Asghar Khan, Dean, Faculty of Rehabilitation & Allied Health Sciences
  Riphah International University, Pakistan.

 

Freedom of editing

The journal's editor has complete control over its editorial content. The proprietors of the journals do not actively interfere with the assessment, selection, or editing of any particular article, nor do they foster an environment that would strongly influence their decisions.

Open Access Copyrights/licensed Policy

The work published by RJAHS is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

 

The RJAHS permits the following uses of its published work: "Adapt remix, transform, build upon the material" and "Shared copied and redistributed in any medium or format." The authors maintain all rights to the full text for free download and unrestricted electronic printing, as well as the freedom to share and distribute the work via any medium, including Twitter, academic and professional networking sites like Academia.edu, Research Gate, LinkedIn, Google Scholar, and Facebook.

 

Author fees or charges:

Every article published in the RJAHS journal is immediately and freely accessible online under the Open Access Copyrights Policy (CC BY-NC 4.0) and is available to the public. Readers can download the full text of RJAHS 's online content for free. The full text of online articles can be downloaded without a membership or payment. The following are the fees or charges for submission to publication:

FEES FOR PUBLICATION AND SUBMISSION

The policy pertaining to author fees or charges is as follows:

 

(No submission charges; zero = 0 Pakistan Rupees for article submission)
Processing Fee for Article: 0 Pakistan Rupees (no processing fees)
Publication Fees for the Article: 0 Pakistan Rupees (no publication fees)

 

RJAHS Misconduct Policy and Publication Ethics:

Consent and Ethics:

Ethics:

Any research involving human subjects, human materials, or human data has to have been approved by the relevant ethics committee and carried out in compliance with the World Medical Association's (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki. All manuscripts reporting such research must include a statement detailing this, along with the name of the ethics committee and the reference number, if applicable. The manuscript should also include information about any exemptions from ethics approval that have been granted for the study (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption). The Editor should have access to additional data and supporting documentation upon request. Submissions may not be accepted if the editor determines that

 

Consent to participate:

Informed consent from participants (or, in the case of minors under 16, their parent or legal guardian) must be obtained for any research involving human subjects, and a statement to that effect must be included in the manuscript.

 

Misconduct policy

The Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC), ICMJE, WAME, and COPE (Corporate Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing) have all provided guidelines for journals that RJAHS adheres to. These rules cover a variety of topics, including authorship, overlapping, fabrication, and falsification. Any violation of these guidelines will be viewed by the journal as misconduct.

 

The Policy regarding Data Fabrication and Plagiarism:

RJAHS complies with the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan's plagiarism policy and is outfitted with Turnitin, a text matching and anti-plagiarism program. This is used to examine submitted manuscripts for plagiarism and duplication. All submitted manuscripts are compared using Turnitin to determine their similarity index; those with an index greater than 19% will be rejected.

Plagiarism detection:

The editor will assess each submission for originality, scientific quality, and content verification. Turnitin's content verification mode will assess text similarity. Acceptance of content will be determined by the similarity index, which needs to be less than 19% and less than from a single source.

 

The thesis title, supervisor's name, department, university, and year of submission must all be stated on the original letter pad with manuscript that an author extracts from their M.Phil. or Ph.D. thesis and submits during the submission process.

 

Self-Plagiarism:

The act of self-plagiarism is not accepted. High levels of self-plagiarism in manuscripts will be subjected to an originality review by the Editor-in-Chief. If authors discover that any of the content in their accepted manuscripts is self-plagiarized, they will be required to either rewrite the relevant passages or quote the exact text and provide a citation for the original work. The journal management team will look into any claims of publication misconduct and, if required, get in touch with the funding agencies or institutions of the authors. If evidence of wrongdoing is discovered, the publication will be retracted or withdrawn, as appropriate. Such distribution, publication, and ethical concerns are taken very seriously by the editors of RJAHS, who are dedicated to upholding a zero-tolerance policy in these cases and have the necessary training.

 

Data fabrication and falsification

To fabricate is to "make up data or results." Manipulating research materials, equipment, or procedures, or altering or deleting data or results so that the study is not accurately represented in the research record, are examples of falsification. The Editor may get in touch with the authors' institution in any suspected cases of covert duplicate manuscript submission, and such cases will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines. Regarding publications that overlap, RJAHS adheres to ICMJE policy.

 

 

RJAHS Advertising policy:

Advertising Policy: Publications that are commercially sponsored and all advertisements are made independently of editorial judgments. Any good or service that is identified in RJAHS publications as an advertisement or that is sponsored is not endorsed by RJAHS. Commercial or financial interests, or any particular agreements with sponsors or advertising clients, do not compromise editorial content.

 

Any form of advertising that harms Riphah International University, the organization that publishes RJAHS, or is unsuitable for the information found on RJAHS may be rejected at RJAHS's discretion. Once an advertisement is posted online, it can be removed from the journal website whenever the publisher or editor(s)-in-chief so desire.

 

Advertising for goods or services that are known to be unhealthy (such as tobacco and alcohol products) will not be accepted by RJAHS.

 

Advertising cannot be false or misleading, and it needs to be verified. Advertisers and the good or service they are promoting should be prominently displayed. Copy with extravagant or exaggerated wording will not be accepted. Advertisements that appear to be indecent or offensive in text or artwork, or that deal with subjects related to personal, racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, or religious matters, will not be accepted.

 

RJAHS prohibits the targeting of any therapy, exercise, medication, or treatment-specific campaign to a particular article or on any page that contains content related to the product(s) under advertisement. Advertisers are prohibited from using keywords in their links to articles, from targeting their advertising to appear in the same place and at the same time as a specific article mentioning that product, and from referencing an article that was published concurrently with the advertisement. Ads for therapy, fitness, or drug-specific campaigns should never be deceptive and should always promote responsible and reasonable use.

 

There must be a clear distinction between editorial content and advertisements. "Advertorial" content will not be published by RJAHS, and sponsored supplements must be identified as such. It should be made clear if a supplement was not subjected to peer review or if it was subjected to a different peer review procedure than the rest of the publication.

Editorial choices will not be impacted by marketing choices or by sponsors, advertisers, or current or potential sponsors. The outcomes of any searches a user does on the website by keyword or search topic are not under the control or influence of advertisers or sponsors.

Any request for an advertisement outside of RJAHS's regular advertising slots should be sent to editorial, which will reply with a comprehensive and final decision in two business days.

 

 

Advertising with us

RJAHS Advertising Tariff

Price is Per Issue from Pakistan:

Placement	One Issue (Pak Rs)	For 02 Issues (Pak Rs)
Booklet A4 size (Four Colors)	1,950 (Four Colors)	3,900 (Four Colors)
For Overseas advertisements will be charged equal amount in dollars plus 100 dollars.

 

 

Policy for complaints about advertising:

The Advertisements page will contain information regarding complaints regarding advertisements.

Kindly direct any grievances regarding advertising to [email protected]. With the subject line "COMPLAIN ADVERT........"

 

RJAHS Archiving Policy:

Publications from the RJAHS are stored in and accessible through a digital archive. RJAHS journal content is deposited in the PKP PN to ensure long-term digital preservation. We submit requests for PKP PN on OJS through the OJS system. OJS journals are to be preserved digitally by PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN). The link to the Keepers registry: https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2410-888X.

 

RJAHS Article Correction Appeal Withdrawal Policy:

 

Retractions and corrections:

In rare instances, RJAHS may need to retract or make corrections to articles published in its journals in order to preserve the academic record's integrity.

Publicating a retract or correction note that is connected to the original article in both directions. Any changes made to the source article will be explained in the note. A wide index will be used to find the corrected or retracted version of the article, while the original remains publicly available. We reserve the right to remove content from our website and archive sites if it is deemed to violate someone's rights or to be defamatory. When mistakes or ethical concerns are discovered in a published piece, authors, readers, or organizations are urged to get in touch with the

Complaints and Appeal:

For complaints about publication ethics or scientific content, the Editor will follow guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editor will then decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant. 

If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, it will be escalated to the journal’s editorial and publishing management team for investigation. Send your query with subject: “ETHICAL CONCERN along with Article no.” via email to [email protected].

For complaints about processes, such as time taken for review, the Editor will review and respond to the complainant’s concerns. This feedback will be provided to relevant stakeholders to guide improvements to processes and procedures. Send your query with subject: “ARTICLE PROCESS TIME LONG along with Article no.” via email to [email protected].

For Appeal against a rejection:

Only one appeal is permitted for each manuscript. Final decisions on appeals will be made by the Editorial Board Member handling the paper or the Editor. Appeal must address:

• the authors can demonstrate that an error that determined the final decision has been made – by a referee or the Editors – during review

or

• if important additional data can be provided

or

• if a convincing case of bias in the process can be demonstrated

Send your query with subject: “APPEAL ON REJECTION with Article no.” via email to [email protected]

RJAHS policy on Withdrawal:

Authors are not allowed to submit their manuscripts anywhere else without this confirmation email from RJAHS. In case of any such misconduct authors will be included in the black list for future correspondence. Submitted manuscripts to RJAHS can be withdrawn at any stage of evaluation process without any penalty imposed but the authors are bound to inform the Editor via email or using OJS system with reason of withdrawing the manuscript. With subject “WITHDRAWL along with ARTICLE no.” send your email to [email protected]

 

RJAHS Peer Review Policy:

Peer Review Policy:

The Riphah Journal of Allied Health Sciences uses “double-blind peer review” whereby both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the process. Submitted manuscripts are screened by the editors to check the scope, suitability and formatting. Rejected manuscripts will be sent back to the authors. Potentially suitable manuscripts are then sent to potential reviewers who are asked to respond within two weeks and then given 2-3 weeks to review. If reviewers fail to respond within the given time, they may be replaced with alternates to keep the review process moving along. Should the referees’ reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought? Manuscripts may also be sent out for statistical review. The entire manuscript workflow was done on OJS system; author article submission, review assigning, reviewer reports, editorial staff recommendations based on reviewer comments (reject, minor revision, major revision publish) and editor decision. Detail Graphical presentation of the overall flow of peer review process can be seen https://RJAHS.riphah.edu.pk/peer-review-process/ .

Decision and number of Reviewers:

Based on the feedback from at least 2 external reviewers and editorial staff recommendations, the Editors’ judgment a decision is given on the manuscript. The editors and reviewers of RJAHS treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents, which means they will not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone without the authors’ permission. During the process of manuscript review, the following people may have access to manuscripts: Editors and editorial staff and the external peer reviewers.

Interested Reviewers:

Interested reviewers email their CV to the Editor of RJAHS: [email protected]
Following information must be along with cv should be included:

            Name:
            Affiliation:
            Specialty:
            Subspecialty:
            City:
            Country:
            Contact No.

 

Reviewer Guidelines:

ETHICAL GUIDELINES for Reviewer:

NOTE: These guidelines are retrieved from Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan manual for “Ethical Guidelines for Journals”

 

FOR REVIEWERS [EXPLANATION]:

The peer reviewer is responsible for critically reading and evaluating a manuscript in their specialty field, and then providing respectful, constructive, and honest feedback to authors about their submission. It is appropriate for the Peer Reviewer to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, ways to improve the strength and quality of the work, and evaluate the relevance and originality of the manuscript. Review of the manuscript by reviewers is not only an essential component of formal scholarly engagement, but is also a fundamental step in the publication process as it aids Editor in the editorial decision making. It also allows author(s) improve their manuscript through editorial communications. Scholars accepting to review a research paper have an ethical responsibility to complete this assignment professionally. The quality, credibility and reputation of a journal also depend on the peer review process. The peer review process depends on the trust, and demands that a reviewer is supposed to fulfill ethically. These professionals are the momentum arm of the review process, but they may be performing this job without any formal training. As a consequence, they may be (especially young professionals) unaware of their ethical obligations. The Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan wants to list down ‘Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers’ so that all reviewers provide their valuable services in a standardized manner.

CONDUCTING A REVIEW

INITIAL STEPS: 

Read the manuscript, supplementary data files and ancillary material thoroughly (e.g., reviewer instructions, required ethics and policy statements), getting back to the journal if anything is not clear and requesting any missing or incomplete items you need. Do not contact the authors directly without the permission of the journal. It is important to understand the scope of the review before commencing (i.e., is a review of raw data expected?).

CONFIDENTIALITY: 

• Reviewers should consider the research paper as a confidential document and must not discuss its content on any platform except in cases where professional advice is being sought with the authorization of the Editor, and
• Reviewers are professionally and ethically bound not to disclose the details of any research paper prior to its publication without the prior approval of the Editor.

Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and refrain from using information obtained during the peer review process for your own or another’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others. Do not involve anyone else in the review of a manuscript (including early career researchers you are mentoring), without first obtaining permission from the journal. The names of any individuals who have helped with the review should be included so that they are associated with the manuscript in the journal’s records and can also receive due recognition for their efforts.

FAVORITISM AND COMPETING INTERESTS:

It is important to remain unbiased by considerations related to the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, origins of a manuscript or by commercial considerations. If you discover a competing interest that might prevent you from providing a fair and unbiased review, notify the journal and seek advice.  While waiting for a response, refrain from looking at the manuscript and associated material in case the request to review is rescinded. Similarly, notify the journal as soon as possible if you find you do not have the necessary expertise to assess the relevant aspects of a manuscript so as not to unduly delay the review process. In the case of double-blind review, if you suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential competing or conflict of interest.

SUSPICION OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS: CONSIDERATIONS:

• If the reviewer suspects that the research paper is almost the same as someone else’s work, s/he will ethically inform the Editor and provide its citation as a reference.
• If the reviewer suspects that results in the research paper to be untrue/unrealistic/fake, s/he will share it with the Editor,
• If there has been an indication of violating ethical norms in the treatment of human beings (e.g. children, female, poor people, disabled, elderly, etc), then this should be identified to the Editor, and

If you come across any irregularities with respect to research and publication ethics do let the journal know. For example, you may have concerns that misconduct occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript, or you may notice substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article. In the case of these or any other ethical concerns, contact the editor directly and do not attempt to investigate on your own. It is appropriate to cooperate, in confidence, with the journal, but not to personally investigate further unless the journal asks for additional information or advice.

TRANSFERABILITY OF PEER REVIEW: 

Publishers may have policies related to transferring peer reviews to other journals in the publisher’s portfolio (sometimes referred to as portable or cascading peer review). Reviewers may be asked to give permission for the transfer of their reviews if that is journal policy. If a manuscript is rejected from one journal and submitted to another, and you are asked to review that same manuscript, you should be prepared to review the manuscript afresh as it may have changed between the two submissions and the journal’s criteria for evaluation and acceptance may be different. In the interests of transparency and efficiency it may be appropriate to provide your original review for the new journal (with permission to do so from the original journal), explaining that you had reviewed the submission previously and noting any changes.

SUITABILITY AND RAPIDITY:

The Reviewers should:

• Inform the Editor, if they do not have the subject expertise required to carry out the review and s/he should inform the Editor immediately after receiving a request.
• Be responsible to act promptly and submit review report on time.
• Immediately inform the Editor of any possible delays and suggest another date of submission for a review report, and
• Not unnecessarily delay the review process, either by prolonged delay in submission of their review or by requesting unnecessary additional data/information from the Editor or author(s).

STANDARDS OF OBJECTIVITY:

• The reviews should be objectively carried out with a consideration of high academic, scholarly and scientific standards.
• All judgments should be meticulously established and maintained in order to ensure the full comprehension of the reviewer’s comments by the editors and the author(s).
• Both reviewers and author(s) in rebuttal should avoid unsupported assertions,
• The reviewer may justifiably criticize a manuscript but it would be inappropriate to resort to personal criticism on the author(s), and
• The reviewers should ensure that their decision is purely based on the quality of the research paper and not influenced, either positively or negatively, by any personal, financial, or other conflicting considerations or by intellectual bias.

DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

• A reviewer should not, for the purpose of his/her own research, use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript, without the approval of the Editor.
• The data included in the research paper is confidential and the reviewer shall not be allowed to use if for his/her personal study,
• A reviewer must declare any potentially conflicting interests (e.g. personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious). In such situation, s/he will be required to follow the journal’s policies.
• A reviewer should be honest enough to declare conflicts of interest, if, the research paper under review is the same as to his/her presently conducted study.
• If the reviewer feels unqualified to separate his/her bias, s/he should immediately return the manuscript to the Editor without review, and justify to him/her about the situation.
• Without the prior approval of the Editor.
• This should be brought in the Editor’s knowledge.

CONTENT QUALITY AND ORIGINALITY:

• Is the article sufficiently novel and interesting to warrant publication?
• Does the article adhere to the journal’s standards?
• Is the research question an important one?
• In order to determine its originality and appropriateness for the journal, it might be helpful to think of the research in terms of what percentile it is in?
• Is it in the top 25% of papers in this field?

You might wish to do a quick literature search using tools such as Scopus to see if there are any reviews of the area. If the research has been covered previously, pass on references of those works to the editor. As for as evaluating originality, the reviewers should consider the following elements:

Does the research paper add to existing knowledge?

Are the research questions and/or hypotheses in line with the objective of the research work?

ORGANIZATION AND CLARITY:

Title: Does it clearly describe the article?

Abstract: Does it reflect the content of the article?

Introduction: Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated? Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context, and explain what other authors’ findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis and the general experimental design or method.

Method: Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected? Is the design suitable for answering the question posed? Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research? Does the article identify the procedures followed? Are these ordered in a meaningful way? If the methods are new, are they explained in detail? Was the sampling appropriate? Have the equipment and materials been adequately described? Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?

Results: This is where the author/s should explain in words what he/she discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted. Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.

Conclusion/Discussion: Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable? Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and to earlier research? Does the article support or contradict previous theories? Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?

PREPARING A REPORT

FORMAT: 

Follow journal’s instructions for writing and posting the review. If a particular format or scoring rubric is required, use the tools supplied by the journal. Be objective and constructive in your review, providing feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. For example, be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements, to help editors in their evaluation. Be professional and refrain from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments or unfounded accusations.

APPROPRIATE FEEDBACK: 

Bear in mind that the editor requires a fair, honest, and unbiased assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. Most journals allow reviewers to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as comments to be read by the authors. The journal may also ask for a recommendation to accept/revise/reject; any recommendation should be congruent with the comments provided in the review. If you have not reviewed the whole manuscript, do indicate which aspects of the manuscript you have assessed. Ensure your comments and recommendations for the editor are consistent with your report for the authors; most feedback should be put in the report that the authors will see. Confidential comments to the editor should not be a place for denigration or false accusation, done in the knowledge that the authors will not see your comments.

LANGUAGE AND STYLE: 

Remember it is the authors’ paper, so do not attempt to rewrite it to your own preferred style if it is basically sound and clear; suggestions for changes that improve clarity are, however, important. In addition, be aware of the sensitivities surrounding language issues that are due to the authors writing in a language that is not their first or most proficient language, and phrase the feedback appropriately and with due respect.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER WORK: 

It is the job of the peer reviewer to comment on the quality and rigor of the work they receive. If the work is not clear because of missing analyses, the reviewer should comment and explain what additional analyses would clarify the work submitted. It is not the job of the reviewer to extend the work beyond its current scope. Be clear which (if any) suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work.

ACCOUNTABILITY: 

Prepare the report by yourself, unless you have permission from the journal to involve another person. Refrain from making unfair negative comments or including unjustified criticisms of any competitors’ work that is mentioned in the manuscript. Refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to your (or an associate’s) work merely to increase citation counts or to enhance the visibility of your or your associate’s work; suggestions must be based on valid academic or technological reasons. Do not intentionally prolong the review process, either by delaying the submission of your review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from the journal or author.

RJAHS Sponsor & Partnership policy:

Main sponsor: Faculty of Rehabilitation & Allied health Sciences, Riphah International University, Pakistan: https://www.riphah.edu.pk/

Sources of Support:
Higher Education Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan: Higher Education Commission (HEC), Islamabad.

Annual Subscription of Printed Journal:

Online access to full text is free to all readers. RJAHS is published on controlled circulation basis and distributed among the faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences and all Physical Therapy Colleges of Pakistan. Limited number of complimentary copies are sent to HEC, universities, medical colleges, libraries and general practitioners of Pakistan.

Reprint services for authors and are available for those requiring professional quality reproductions of articles. Reprints are produced from the final PDF of the article.

Annual subscription of print form of RJAHS for the institutions/individuals: FREE in Pakistan. For Oversea: Request for quotation.

For this, please contact: [email protected]

Note: All subscription request will be evaluated; editor has the full right to subscribe it or any discontinuation.

Language of RJAHS content and What Editor Wants: English Language?

It is the language scientists used among different countries in the world use to communicate with each other, publishing in English allows you to increase the possible audience. This will help you achieve the goal that led you to publish in the first place: To add to our understanding and readable to the world by informing other scientists about your research.

What Editor Wants:

Following things the editor wants that research should be:

• Grammarly well written and in simple professional language which describes research that advances the field,
• Document should be prepared carefully and
• Formatted according to journal guidelines and must follows ethical standards.