The International Journal of Healthcare and Education (IJHE) is committed to maintaining a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and ethical research.

IJHE employs a double-blind peer review system, in which both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review process to ensure objectivity and impartiality.

Peer Review Policies

1. Review Process

• After initial editorial screening, manuscripts deemed suitable are sent to at least two independent expert reviewersfor evaluation.

• Reviewers are selected based on their subject matter expertise, academic qualifications, and prior experience in peer reviewing.

• Reviews are expected to be thorough, objective, and constructive, providing authors with feedback to improve the quality of their manuscripts.

2. Criteria for Review

Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on:

• Originality and novelty of the research

• Methodological rigor and appropriateness

• Validity of data and analysis

• Relevance and contribution to healthcare and education fields

• Clarity, organization, and quality of writing

• Compliance with ethical standards

3. Confidentiality

• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.

• Manuscripts must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal advantage before publication.

4. Anonymity

• IJHE maintains a double-blind review system to ensure fairness and minimize bias.

• Reviewers' identities are not disclosed to authors, and vice versa.

5. Conflict of Interest

• Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality (e.g., recent collaborations, financial relationships, competition) and decline the review if necessary.

• Reviewers should not review manuscripts where they have any personal, professional, or financial conflicts.

6. Timeliness

• Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the timeframe provided (typically 2–4 weeks).

• If unable to complete the review on time, reviewers should notify the editorial office promptly.

7. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers will make one of the following recommendations:

• Accept without revision

• Accept with minor revisions

• Accept with major revisions (requiring resubmission)

• Reject

The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection rests with the journal’s editorial team, based on reviewers’ reports and editorial judgment.

---

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Provide Honest and Constructive Feedback: Reviews should be objective, balanced, and respectful, offering clear explanations for recommendations.

• Maintain Confidentiality: Manuscripts and associated review discussions must be kept confidential.

• Disclose Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must inform the editor of any potential conflicts before agreeing to review.

• Be Timely: Reviews should be submitted within the agreed deadline to facilitate a smooth publication process.

• Identify Ethical Issues: Reviewers should alert the editor to any suspected ethical problems such as plagiarism, data falsification, or unethical research practices.