Publication process

Health Innovation Reports (HIR) follows a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer-review process to ensure the scientific accuracy, originality, and quality of all published manuscripts. This structured workflow supports our mission of advancing knowledge across medicine, nursing, public health, biology, pharmacology, and allied health sciences.

1. Initial Evaluation:
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo a preliminary review by the editorial team, including a language and plagiarism screening. Submissions with a high similarity index (above 20%) or inadequate language quality are returned to authors for revision, along with a similarity report and editorial recommendations.

2. Peer Review:
Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation are assigned to two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript’s scientific rigor, methodology, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field using a standardized review form. If there is a discrepancy in the recommendations (e.g., one rejection and one acceptance), a third reviewer is invited to ensure a balanced assessment.

3. Author Revisions:
Based on reviewer feedback, authors are required to revise their manuscripts accordingly. A revised version must address all comments thoroughly. To proceed to the acceptance stage, at least two out of three reviewers must recommend the manuscript for publication.

4. Editorial Decision:
The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned senior editor, considering the reviewers’ evaluations and the quality of revisions. Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist, such as submissions by close colleagues, family members, or those involving affiliated institutions or products.

HIR is committed to maintaining the highest standards of ethical publishing, transparency, and collaboration throughout every stage of the editorial and publication process.