Peer Review Process

GHU Open is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific integrity through rigorous peer review. All submissions undergo a comprehensive evaluation process to ensure scientific quality, originality, and ethical compliance.

Review Model

GHU Open employs a double-blind peer review model, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. This approach helps minimize bias and ensures impartial evaluation based solely on scientific merit.

Review Workflow

Initial Editorial Screening (1-3 working days)
Upon submission, the manuscript is screened by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor for: scope alignment with the journal, basic quality and presentation standards, ethical compliance (IRB approval, trial registration), originality (plagiarism check via iThenticate or similar tools), and completeness of submission materials.

Manuscripts that do not meet basic standards may be rejected without external review (desk rejection).
Reviewer Assignment (3-7 days)
Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to a Section Editor, who identifies and invites at least three independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their publication record, subject matter expertise, and absence of conflicts of interest with the authors.
Peer Review (3-4 weeks)
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript according to standardized criteria including originality, scientific significance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and ethical compliance. Reviewers provide a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject.
Editorial Decision (within 35 days of submission)
Based on reviewer reports and the Section Editor's assessment, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision: Accept (manuscript accepted for publication), Minor Revisions (small changes required; second review may not be necessary), Major Revisions (substantial revisions required; revised manuscript will undergo a second round of review), or Reject (manuscript not suitable for publication).
Revision and Resubmission
For revision decisions, authors are typically given 4-8 weeks to submit a revised manuscript with a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Major revisions are sent back to the original reviewers when possible.
Final Decision and Production
Upon acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading. Authors review proofs before publication. Articles are published online in their final form upon completion of production and assigned to the next available issue.

Timeline Targets

First decision: 35 days from submission
Time to publication after acceptance: 4-6 weeks
Total time from submission to publication: typically 3-4 months

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

Publication record in relevant field
Active research engagement
Geographic and institutional diversity
Absence of conflicts of interest with authors
Demonstrated expertise relevant to the manuscript

The journal maintains a pool of approximately 200+ active reviewers and welcomes new reviewers. Researchers interested in serving as reviewers may register at the journal website or contact the editorial office.

Reviewer Recognition

GHU Open recognizes the essential contribution of peer reviewers through:

Annual Reviewer Acknowledgment published in the journal
Web of Science / Publons integration for verified review records
Reviewer certificates upon request
Outstanding Reviewer Award presented annually

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must:

Not share manuscripts with others without editorial permission
Not use unpublished information for personal advantage
Disclose conflicts of interest immediately
Disclose use of AI tools in conducting the review
Provide constructive, professional, and timely feedback

Appeals

Authors who believe an editorial decision was made in error may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief at ghu@ghuopen.org within 30 days of the decision. Appeals must include specific scientific arguments addressing reviewer concerns. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with at least one Associate Editor not involved in the original decision.

Special Considerations

Submissions from Editorial Board members are handled by an independent editor with no conflict of interest, and undergo the same rigorous review process.
Special issue manuscripts follow the same peer review standards as regular submissions.
Invited articles (e.g., editorials) may undergo modified review at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

For questions about the peer review process, please contact ghu@ghuopen.org.