Health Focus Journal (HF) applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, scientific validity, and relevance of all published manuscripts.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the editorial team to assess their relevance to the journal's focus and scope, compliance with the Author Guidelines, originality, basic academic quality, and ethical requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements or are outside the scope of the journal may be rejected at this stage without proceeding to peer review.

2. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, and knowledge of the relevant field. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, or research presented in the manuscript.

3. Peer Review Method

Health Focus Journal uses a double-anonymous peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, independently, and confidentially.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are generally asked to evaluate the following aspects:

• Relevance to the journal's focus and scope
• Originality and novelty
• Scientific and academic quality
• Clarity of the research objectives
• Appropriateness of the methodology
• Accuracy and presentation of results
• Quality of discussion and interpretation
• Validity of conclusions
• Ethical considerations
• Quality and relevance of references
• Clarity and organization of the manuscript

Reviewers should provide constructive comments that can help authors improve their manuscripts.

5. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editor's assessment, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The final editorial decision is the responsibility of the editor. Reviewer recommendations are considered carefully but do not automatically determine the final decision.

6. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors should respond to all reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript within the specified timeframe.

Authors are encouraged to provide a point-by-point response explaining how each comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all information contained in submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts and their contents must not be shared with or used by others without permission from the editor.

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest and should decline the review if their impartiality could be compromised.

8. Review Timeline

Health Focus Journal aims to conduct the peer review process efficiently while maintaining academic quality. The review period may vary depending on the availability of appropriate reviewers, the complexity of the manuscript, and the number of revisions required.

9. Editorial Independence

The editorial team is responsible for ensuring that peer review and publication decisions are based on academic quality, originality, relevance, ethical standards, and the journal's scope. Personal, institutional, commercial, or other non-academic interests should not improperly influence editorial decisions.