Instructions for Authors

 

 

Criteria for Publication

GHSP Journal Editors and peer reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Is the topic important and relevant?
• Is the work original and does it add value to the existing body of knowledge?
• Does it use sound study (or program) design and methodology (or implementation)?
• Does it include sound use of evidence?
• Does it have compelling conclusions that are actionable and based on the evidence presented?
• Is the writing clear?
• If your article reports results from research or program experience in a given country, have you included authors based in that country (see Reflexivity Policy)? 
• Does it keep our key intended audience of public health practitioners in mind? What are the practical implications of the work documented in your paper for decision makers focused on health programs and services?
• Does it provide sufficient detail about key program elements?
• How the intervention was implemented?
• Whether an intervention or program was a success?
• Characteristics of the setting the reader needs to understand the conditions that are necessary for success?
• What factors appear to account for the observed success/failures?
• For example, in addition to reporting the impact of a communication program on child undernutrition:
• What details are important to know about the program itself?
• How was the program delivered? 
• What were the important characteristics of the population or setting that may be relevant to observed performance? 
• For “lessons learned,” will findings be relevant to the reader's setting or context?​

This video includes tips for what editors and reviewers are looking for in GHSP articles. 

Note: Manuscripts should not be under consideration or published in other journals or scholarly publications, such as textbooks. Prior documentation in project briefs or reports is acceptable, although normally it will be expected that the journal article will be developed beyond the technical report, for example with regard to engaging with the existing published literature, analysis, interpretation or programmatic implications.

 

Reflexivity Policy and Checklist

At GHSP, we seek to promote more equitable partnerships and collaborations between program managers, policy makers, and researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and those in high-income countries (HICs), particularly as they apply to article authorship. GHSP has a responsibility to leverage our position to ensure the inclusion of authors from LMICs and, notably, their perspectives.

If your manuscript reports on research or a program activity in one or more LMICs implemented in partnership with individuals from HICs, we expect the inclusion of authors from the country where the research and/or program activities were done. If no authors are included from that country(s), we require that the corresponding author explain why. In addition to this requirement, GHSP requires all corresponding authors to complete the Reflexivity Checklist for each manuscript they submit to GHSP for consideration.

 

Types of Articles We Publish

We consider the following article types, but we will consider ideas for other article types as well. Please consult the guidelines provided for each article type and the Formatting Guidelines to prepare your article for submission.

Article Type	Description	Word Limit*	Abstract	Example
Viewpoint	Present perspectives of an author(s) on significant public health issues in an insightful way.	1,500	None required	Do Children With Congenital Zika Syndrome Have Cerebral Palsy?
Commentary	Present a new or unique perspective on important public health issues with statements supported by evidence. May also include personal opinion or debate-style articles.	3,500	None required	Does the Current Global Health Agenda Lack Vision?
Original Article	Present research-based or systematically documented experiential knowledge gained from implementation and management of health programs.	5,500	300 word limit	Exploring the Adaptations of the Free Maternity Policy Implementation by Health Workers and County Officials in Kenya
Program Case Study	Discuss the development or implementation of a program, policy, or intervention that addressed a specific public health issue in a country and its significant or promising impact on health outcomes. May include preliminary qualitative or quantitative data or other findings that are currently available. Not merely descriptive, but also analytical, drawing inferences from the available evidence, generating insight, and communicating key implications for others facing similar challenges.	5,500	300 word limit	Juntos: A Support Program for Families Impacted by Congenital Zika Syndrome in Brazil
Field Action Report	Report on experience and observations during program implementation that could be relevant to others in different countries.	3,000	300 word limit	Lessons Learned in Improving the Quality of a Free Reproductive Health Hotline in Benin
Review/Programmatic Review & Analysis	Critical reviews of studies, including meta-analytic, narrative, realist, scoping, qualitative, and umbrella reviews, or critical review and analysis of programs.	5,500	300 word limit	A Review of Vitamin A Supplementation in South Sudan: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities for the Way Forward
Methodology	Documents methodology issues related to systems, policy, and implementation.	4,000	300 word limit	Transitioning to Digital Systems: The Role of World Health Organization’s Digital Adaptation Kits in Operationalizing Recommendations and Interoperability Standards
Technical Note	Report on current issues related to the scientific/technical aspects of global health research or programming.	1,500	300 word limit	Development of a Modular and Equitable Surgical Simulator
Innovation	Present new techniques, technologies, or scientific advances in the global health field.	1,000	300 word limit	Menstrual Bleeding Changes Are NORMAL: Proposed Counseling Tool to Address Common Reasons for Non-Use and Discontinuation of Contraception
Letter to the Editor	Discuss articles published recently in GHSP.	1,000	None required

*The word limits listed are recommendations, not strict limits and do not include the abstract, key messages, tables, figure captions, and references. 

 

Checklist for Submitting a Manuscript

Checklist for New Submissions

1. Before submitting your manuscript online, determine that GHSP is the most appropriate journal to submit your manuscript by reading our criteria for publication and more about the journal.
2. Ensure that your manuscript adheres to our Formatting Guidelines. If you need assistance with writing and editing your manuscript, please consult the Resources for Writing Journal Articles.
3. Ensure that you include all documents listed below.
4. Submit your manuscript through our online submission system. After creating an account, the online system will ask you to enter information about your manuscript.

Documents to Include:

• Cover letter (not required, in a separate file)
• Title page (required, in a separate file) must include:
  • Full title (maximum of 20 words)
  • Short title (maximum of 10 words)
  • All authors who meet all 4 ICMJE authorship criteria should list full names, associated affiliations, and country of residence
  • Corresponding author's email address
  • Author contributions detailing individual contributions to the manuscript; listed according to National Information Standards Organization contributor roles taxonomy.
  • Acknowledgments (indicate NA if not needed)
  • Funding statement (indicate NA if not needed)
  • Disclaimer (indicate NA if not needed)
  • Competing interests (indicate none declared, if appropriate)
• Manuscript with full title and references (Microsoft Word)
  • Teaser key message (limit to 40 words) (See Formatting Guidelines for more information.)
  • Key Messages (limit to 175 words) (See Formatting Guidelines for more information.)
  • Abstract (maximum of 300 words)
  • Figures, tables, and photos embedded in the manuscript where they are referenced
• Supplementary materials (e.g., counseling tools, training curricula, job aids, and movie or audio files, related to the content of the submitted manuscript to share with other readers and allow them to use or adapt the resources for their own purposes. These materials will be posted as “supplements” connected with your article, and the same Creative Commons Attribution license will apply to the supplementary materials as to the main article. Please delete any identifying information as the reviewers will be able to access the supplemental material.
• Reflexivity checklist

All authors must complete the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. You do not need to submit the form to the Journal. Instead, the corresponding author should keep the forms on file in the event that a question arises about competing interests related to your submission. The online submission system will ask you, however, to declare any competing interests for all authors, based on the ICMJE Uniform Disclosure Form. If there are no competing interests, please indicate, “None declared.”

In general, papers should be prepared in accordance with the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Please consult the Ethical and Responsible Publication Principles and Policies for additional guidance.

Submission Checklist for Revised Submissions (after peer review)

Submit your revised manuscript through our online submission system. 

Documents to include:

• Cover letter (can be carried over from initial submission)
• Title page (can be carried over from initial submission)
• Response to reviewers (and Editors if applicable) in table format 
• Manuscript (clean) with references as a Microsoft Word document
  • Teaser key message (limit to 40 words) (See Formatting Guidelines for more information.)
  • Key Messages (limit to 175 words) (See  Formatting Guidelines for more information.)
  • Abstract (maximum of 300 words)
• Figures in a separate editable files (Adobe Illustrator, PowerPoint, Excel, JPG and not Word document) with captions (high resolution, editable files)
• Tables in a separate file with titles 
• Photos in a separate file (300 dpi, jpg) with photo submission form completed
• Supplementary materials (e.g., counseling tools, training curricula, job aids, and movie or audio files, related to the content of the submitted paper to share with other readers and allow them to use or adapt the resources for their own purposes. These materials will be posted as “supplements” connected with your article, and the same Creative Commons Attribution license will apply to the supplementary materials as to the main article.
• Manuscript with track changes should be included as a supplemental file. 

 

Formatting Guidelines

Formatting Text

• Use U.S. English spelling. 
• All text should be in 12-point Times New Roman font and double-spaced.
• Insert page numbers.
• Do not use line numbers; these will be inserted by our intake system. 
• References listed in a simple numbered list. Do not use footnotes or endnotes for references.
• Do not use footnotes in the text. Incorporate any footnotes into the main text, if possible. 

GHSP refers to the AMA Manual of Style (11^th edition), published by the American Medical Association and Oxford University Press.

Title Page

The title page MUST include all of the following information:

• Concise full title (20 words or fewer). 
  • Include the study design type, if applicable, for example, “a prospective cohort study,” or “a case-control study.”
  • Include the city and/or country name in the title, if applicable.
• Short title: (10 words or fewer)
• Author names and respective institutional affiliations and their locations (city, country). Do not include educational degrees or position titles.
  • Notes: Author names should be listed only on the title page to ensure anonymity during peer review. 
  • If there is more than one first author, please indicate that.
  • If the corresponding author will change after publication, please indicate that.
• Author contributions using contributor roles taxonomy. 
• Acknowledgments
• Funding statement
• Competing interests

Main Body

The main body of the manuscript should include: 

• Title
• Abstract: Limited to 300 words. Can be structured in IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format or unstructured.
• Teaser Key Message: In 40 words or less, succinctly summarize the one essential message of your article.
• Detailed Key Messages: All manuscripts must include key messages that detail the essential points of their manuscript.
  1. For viewpoints, commentaries, and innovation articles:  Include “Key Messages” which further details the major points of the article in 1-3 bulleted items. This should answer: What new information does this article contribute? Why is this information important?
  2. For original articles, reviews, field action reports, short reports, technical notes, and methodologies, clearly articulate 2-3 essential points for the reader to take away:
  • Key Findings and major points of the article in 1-3 bulleted items that answer: What new information does this article contribute? Why is this information important?
  • List the Key Implications of the article that are directed toward specific public health audience segments (e.g., policy makers, program managers, donors). This should not simply restate what is in the abstract, but rather answer the questions: How can this article be useful to different audiences?)

The main text can be structured in different ways, especially for papers reporting on program implementation issues. The conventional IMRAD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) for scientific articles, or variations of it, may be appropriate. For program implementation articles, an additional heading for “Program Description” (including details of how the program was implemented) may be inserted after the Introduction. Subheadings are encouraged to better orient the reader to the content.

Illustrations, Figures, and Photos

• Figures in a separate editable file (Adobe Illustrator, PowerPoint, Excel, JPG and not Word document) 
• Resolution of photos should be approximately 300 dpi (dots per inch), and line or halftone figures and illustrations should be approximately 600 dpi. Please complete the photo permission form. 
• For the initial submission, each item should be embedded in the manuscript.
• For a revised submission (after peer review), each illustration and figure should be a separate file. Submission of original and editable files is highly encouraged. The quality of the files received will affect time taken to prepare the figures for publication. 
• Number each illustration and figure separately and include a short title. Cite each in the text in consecutive numerical order.
• Photos should have a short caption describing the action in the photo, name of the photographer and organization (if applicable), and year the photo was taken.

Tables

Tables should have a number, include a descriptive title, and be cited in the text in consecutive numerical order.

• For the initial submission, each table should be embedded in the manuscript.
• For a revised submission (after peer review), tables should be in a separate file.

References

GHSP follows the American Medical Association (AMA) (11th edition) reference style. References should be numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals in superscript in the order in which they are first mentioned in the text. At the end of the article, include a list of all references cited in the order in which they were mentioned in the text. Below are examples of some of the most commonly used reference types:

Journal article (List up to 6 authors; if more than 6 authors, list the first 3 followed by et al.)

Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(4):284-287.

Book

Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical Microbiology. 4th ed. Mosby; 2002.

Monograph / Report

World Health Organization (WHO). A Universal Truth: No Health Without a Workforce. WHO; 2013. Accessed January 4, 2020. https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/knowledge/resources/GHWA-a_universal_truth_report.pdf

Website

About the Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. Accessed February 8, 2020. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

 

Journal Policies

 

Open Access and Copyright

Global Health: Science and Practice applies the Creative Commons Attribution License to all articles that we publish. Under this license, authors retain ownership of copyright for their articles or they can transfer copyright to their institution, but authors allow anyone without permission to copy, distribute, transmit, and/or adapt articles, so long as the original authors and source are cited. Authors are allowed to post versions of their articles, including the submitted, accepted, and published versions, in an institutional or subject repository or to other social and professional networks. We encourage authors to link to the published version in the repositories when available. 

 

Preprints

Preprints are the authors' report of work that has not been peer reviewed. Authors can share their preprint in any nonprofit preprint server. Authors should disclose that they have posted their article on a preprint server at the time of submission or during the articler review process with the details of the preprint posting, including DOI and other relevant information. Once the article is accepted for publication at GHSP, we encourage authors to link from the preprint version to the published article with the DOI.

 

Peer Review Process

GHSP operates a double-anonymized peer review system, in which the identities of both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. Each paper submitted to GHSP will be screened by our editorial staff, within 6-8 weeks of submission. Original Articles, Reviews/Meta-Analyses, Field Action Reports, Technical Notes, and Methodological papers that are considered appropriate for the Journal will then typically be sent to at least 2 peer reviewers; Commentaries and Viewpoints to at least 1 peer reviewer. We will consider authors' suggestions for reviewers to invite and those to exclude. Letters to the Editor will be reviewed by our editorial staff.

The role of peer reviewers is to recommend acceptance–either with or without revision or resubmission–or rejection of papers. In the case of discordant reviews, the Editors may seek review by an additional expert. The Editors make the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection taking into account reviewers’ recommendations. We aim to issue a final decision on all articles within 4-6 months of submission but due to increased manuscript volume and reviewer shortages, that is not always possible. It will take longer if additional revisions are necessary.

Papers will be sent to a statistician for additional review if necessary based on recommendations from the reviewers and Journal Editors.

Authors can formally appeal an editorial decision, in which case the Journal Editors will review the decision in accordance with the procedures outlined in the COPE Code of Conduct for Editors.

 

Ethical and Responsible Publication Principles and Policies

Global Health: Science and Practice is committed to meeting and upholding established ethical publication policies and practices at all stages of the publication process, drawing on standards and guidelines set by industry associations, namely the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the World Association of Medical Editors, and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Criteria for Authorship

• All authors should meet all 4 of the ICMJE Recommendations criteria for authorship:
  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
  2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content.
  3. Final approval of the version to be published.
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
• Authors should ensure that all authors listed on the article meet all ICJME 4 criteria above and that any individuals who meet these criteria have not been excluded from authorship.
• Authors should submit a statement that details authors’ and other individuals’ contributions to the planning, implementation, research, or writing of the work in the article. All authors should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific parts of the work.
• Authors should acknowledge any individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship but who have contributed to the programming, research, evaluation, analysis, or other aspects of the manuscript preparation in the Acknowledgments section.
• If your manuscript reports on research or a program activity in one or more LMICs implemented in partnership with individuals from HICs, we expect the inclusion of authors from the country where the research and/or program activities were done. If no authors are included from that country(s), we require that the corresponding author explain why. In addition to this requirement, GHSP requires all corresponding authors to complete the Reflexivity Checklist for each manuscript they submit to GHSP for consideration.

Ethics

• Authors should ensure that research was conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, that it was sound and properly executed, and that appropriate methods of data analysis and display were used.
• Research involving human subjects or animals should be conducted according to appropriate ethical standards (i.e., the Declaration of Helsinki).
• Every article that is submitted should include a statement that the researchers obtained ethics approval from the name of the ethics committee institutional review board.
• In some circumstances it may be acceptable for authors to get retrospective ethics approval to publish monitoring or evaluation data collected as part of project efforts (i.e., not strictly research data); in any case, the author needs to explain how data collection conformed to international standards including, if applicable, how informed consent was obtained.
• Every article should include a statement that all participants gave their informed consent before participating, how consent was obtained, and measures to ensure that privacy and confidentiality of personal information were maintained.

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Research Papers

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology, such as ChatGPT, for research publications is expected to rapidly increase in use. In line with organizations, including COPE and Elsevier, GHSP maintains that authors must be transparent about their use of AI technology in producing their papers. AI technology should only be used to improve the readability and clarity in the language of the work. AI technology should not be used to replace or supplement important author tasks, including literature review, data interpretation and analysis, or generation of insights or conclusions. Use of the software should be done with human oversight and control. In instances when author(s) have used AI technology to improve readability and/or clarity, author(s) should carefully review and edit the work to ensure factual accuracy and intended meaning are maintained because AI can generate content that sounds authoritative but that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. 

Authors who use AI technologies must include a statement in their manuscript in either the Methods or Acknowledgments section describing their use of AI technology, including how it was used and the type of technologies used. This statement will appear in the published article. Because AI technology cannot meet the criteria for authorship and cannot take responsibility and be held accountable for all aspects of the submitted work, AI cannot be listed as an author of a paper. Authors are fully responsible and accountable for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by AI technology, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.

Reporting Guidelines

Authors should follow reporting guidelines applicable to the type of research, such as the CONSORT statement for reporting of randomized controlled trials, PRISMA for reporting of systematic reviews, and the mERA checklist for reporting of health interventions using mobile phones. For a full list of reporting guidelines, please refer to the EQUATOR website.

• Authors should disclose sources of research funding and the role of the research funder or sponsor in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting.

Competing Interests

• Authors should disclose relevant financial and nonfinancial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of the findings, in accordance with the ICMJE unified disclosure form.
• All declared competing interests, or a statement indicating that there are no competing interests if appropriate, will be listed at the end of GHSP published articles.

Corrections

• We give ample opportunity for authors to review the manuscript after copyediting and after layout. We ask that authors use this opportunity to make any corrections to wording, ensure accuracy of information, and clarify meaning.
• Authors should alert editors if they discover an error in any submitted, accepted, or published article and should cooperate with the editors in issuing corrections or retractions when required.
• For minor corrections that do not affect the technical or scientific understanding of the article (such as wording preference, typos, etc.), the correction is only made at the discretion of the editors.
• For substantive errors, GHSP will issue corrigenda (author’s error) and errata (publisher’s error). We will publish corrections to published articles as soon as possible and to retract the article if the error renders the work invalid. GHSP may charge a nominal fee for issuing the correction.
• For Advanced Access articles, corrections will be posted online to replace the original version.
• For published articles in an issue, a new version of the article will be posted online with a Corrigendum appearing in the following issue.

Editors' Responsibilities

• Editors will seek to ensure the quality of articles that are published in GHSP and to make fair and unbiased decisions about what is to be published in GHSP. The Editor-in-Chief of GHSP has editorial freedom and full authority over the editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
• Editors encourage authors to engage and collaborate with authors of diverse backgrounds, in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, and geography.
• Editors encourage and ask authors who are implementing programs or conducting research in low- and middle-income countries to engage stakeholders from those countries in meaningful ways in the decision making, planning, implementation, and research.
• GHSP believes an anonymous review process promotes the best quality publications and strives to protect that anonymity for that reason as well as to protect the sensitivities of authors and reviewers. Hence, we strive:
• Editors will protect the confidentiality of authors’ materials during peer review and remind reviewers to do so as well.
• Editors will protect reviewers’ identities unless a reviewer wishes for her/his name to be disclosed.
• Editors will conduct fair and appropriate peer review.
• Editors ensure the integrity of published articles by investigating any serious concerns about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work raised by authors, reviewers, readers, or others while also providing authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints.
• Editors encourage scholarly debate by providing readers the opportunity to post comments online about published articles and/or to submit formal letters to the editor.
• Editors recuse themselves from any discussions or decisions concerning submitted manuscripts on which they are authors or if, for any other reason, they may be seen to have a conflict of interest.
• GHSP does not publish any content that is in violation of any law or regulation, including any USAID global health legislative requirements, family planning guiding principles and policy requirements, and HIV/AIDS legal and policy requirements.

Reviewers

• To agree to review only those manuscripts for which they have expertise in the subject.
• To respond in a reasonable time frame.
• To respect the confidentiality of the peer review process.
• To declare all potential conflicting interests.
• To be objective and constructive in their reviews.

Procedures for Dealing With Alleged Scientific Misconduct

GHSP recognizes our role in protecting the integrity of the public scientific record and will do so by sharing reasonable concerns with authorities who can conduct such an investigation. Examples of scientific misconduct include but are not limited to falsification of data, plagiarism, and improprieties of authorship (such as inclusion of individuals as authors who have not made a definite contribution to the work published or misrepresentation of the same material as original in more than one publication).

All serious allegations of misconduct will be referred to the Editor-In-Chief, who will review the circumstances in consultation with the deputy editors. Initial fact-finding will usually include a request to all the involved parties to state their case and explain the circumstances in writing. In questions of research misconduct centering on methods or technical issues, the Editor-In-Chief may confidentially consult experts to whom the identity of the individuals is anonymized, or if the allegation is against an editor, an outside editor expert.

When allegations concern authors, the peer review and publication process for the manuscript in question will be halted while the process above is carried out. The inquiry will be completed even if the authors withdraw their paper. In the case of allegations against reviewers or editors, those reviewers or editors will be replaced in the peer review process while the matter is investigated.

GHSP subscribes to the principles underlying the COPE guidelines and will use as guidance the COPE flowcharts of suggested actions for specific allegations. If our inquiry concludes in an unsatisfactory response, the Editor-in-Chief will refer the matter to the authors’ institutions or other appropriate bodies. In rare cases, the Editor-in-Chief may decide to retract a published article if he/she is convinced that serious misconduct has happened.

 

Archiving Policy

GHSP preserves access to the journal content via PubMedCentral in the event the journal is no longer published.

 

Article-Level Metrics

GHSP provides information about the article usage on the "Info and Metrics" tab of each article. 

 

Back to Top