Editorial Process

Every Global Health Economics and Sustainability submission will be pre-screened by the editors to ensure its adherence to the scope, policies, and style of the journal before peer review.

Reviewer Suggestions

Author(s) may suggest up to 4 academically qualified reviewers for consideration per submission. Authors should provide the reviewers' full name, email address, affiliation, and reason(s) for recommendation in the cover letter. The editorial team strives to ensure a fair and unbiased peer review process; therefore, there is no guarantee that recommended reviewers will be approached. Authors may also indicate individuals who should not be invited as peer reviewers and provide reasons in the cover letter.

Peer Review Process

The peer review process for Global Health Economics and Sustainability is in line with the general peer review principles of AccScience Publishing. For more details, please refer to AccScience Publishing Editorial Process. In general, two or three review reports are collected for each submitted article.

External Peer Review: For primary research articles (original research, clinical trials, observational studies, case studies), two or three external reviewers, who are not members of the journal's Editorial Board, will be invited for peer review. This ensures independent evaluation and meets indexing requirements for external peer review. If needed, members from within the Editorial Board will be consulted for more comprehensive evaluation of the manuscripts, in addition to the external reviewers, provided they have the relevant expertise and no conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Selection: Reviewers are selected from both the Editorial Board and external experts based on:

• Subject matter expertise relevant to the manuscript
• Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors
• Geographic and institutional diversity when possible

For primary research articles, the review panel typically includes:

• Two or three external reviewers (not members of the Editorial Board)
• Additional reviewers from the Editorial Board and/or external pool as needed for comprehensive evaluation

Conflict of Interest Management: Editorial Board members and external reviewers do not review manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist, including manuscripts from their own institution, close collaborators, former students/supervisors, or co-authors.

Editorial Decisions

Based on review reports and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.

Authors have 7 days to submit minor revisions and 30 days for major revisions. Revision files include the revised manuscript, title page and back matter, cover letter, and response letter. Revisions undergo editorial pre-check and reviewer evaluation.

Post-Acceptance

The peer review process is complete once a submission is accepted for publication. Accepted papers proceed to copy-editing, typesetting, and proofreading before online publication.

For more details, please refer to AccScience Publishing Editorial Process.