The UJHS editorial process is modeled after the double-blind peer-review system used by academic journals. Peer review is designed to minimize bias and facilitate the selection of high-quality manuscripts. The specifics of this process, which takes roughly one month on average, are detailed below:

  • An author submits a manuscript.
  • The editor(s)-in-chief of the journal screens the manuscript. Some manuscripts are rejected prior to peer-review.
  • If the manuscript clears the initial screening, the editor in chief anonymizes the submission and sends it to the appropriate area-specific board editor.
  • The area-specific board editor will review the submission and decide whether to send it on to an appropriate peer-reviewer to review the manuscript. Like the editor in chief, the area-specific board editor can choose to reject a manuscript prior to peer-review.
  • The peer-reviewer notes the changes that would be necessary if the manuscript is to be accepted, and gives an overall recommendation regarding acceptance or rejection. If the peer-reviewer is unsure of whether or not the manuscript should be accepted for publication, a second peer-reviewer is asked to review the submission.
  • The editorial board decides whether to accept the manuscript for publication.
  • The author of an accepted submission makes the necessary changes to the manuscript as recommended by the peer-reviewer, who remains anonymous.
  • The area-specific board editor approves the changes.
  • The manuscript is published.