Peer Review Policy

Archives of Maternal and Child Health is committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly publishing. This policy outlines the principles, processes, and responsibilities governing the peer review of all manuscripts submitted to the journal. We adhere to the core principles of peer review: fairness, integrity, confidentiality, and transparency, guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

All manuscripts considered for publication undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to ensure impartiality. This process is designed to ensure that only work of high quality, originality, and significance to the fields of epidemiology and health data science is published.

The Peer Review Process – this section is detailed in the journal page “Peer Revieew Proccess” (link)

Duties and Rights of Editors - Editors are the decision-makers on which manuscripts are published. They have the following duties and rights:

Duty to uphold quality and scope: The editor must evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit, intellectual content, and relevance to the journal's scope, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Duty of fairness and impartiality: The editor ensures a fair and appropriate double-blind peer review process. They must not use unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for their own research without the authors' explicit written consent.
Duty of confidentiality: The editor must treat all manuscripts submitted to the journal as confidential documents. They must not disclose any information about a manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Duty to manage conflicts of interest: The editor should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest (e.g., personal, professional, or financial). In such cases, they must delegate responsibility to another editor or a member of the editorial board.
Right to make final decisions: The editor has the final responsibility and right to accept or reject a manuscript. This decision may be informed by, but is not bound to, reviewer recommendations. The editor may also request revisions from authors.
Duty to investigate ethical concerns: The editor, in conjunction with the publisher, has the duty to take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised concerning a submitted or published manuscript. This includes following COPE guidelines for issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.

Duties and Rights of Reviewers - Peer reviewers are expert volunteers who provide critical feedback to improve manuscript quality. Their duties and rights include:

Duty to maintain confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript as a confidential document. They must not discuss its content with anyone outside the review process or share it with third parties without the editor's permission.
Duty to declare conflicts of interest: Reviewers must inform the editor of any potential competing interests (financial, institutional, collaborative, or personal) that could bias their evaluation and should recuse themselves from the review if necessary.
Duty to be objective and constructive: Reviews should be conducted objectively, with clear, evidence-based arguments and constructive feedback to help authors improve their work. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Duty to be timely and responsive: Reviewers should agree to review only those manuscripts for which they can provide a high-quality report in a timely manner (typically within 2–4 weeks). If they cannot meet the deadline, they must notify the editor promptly.
Duty to identify ethical issues: Reviewers should alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, or inappropriate authorship attribution.
Right to acknowledgment: While peer review is a voluntary service, the journal recognizes the invaluable contribution of its reviewers through annual acknowledgment on the journal's website.

Duties and Rights of Authors - Authors are the primary creators of the scholarly content. Their duties and rights include:

Duty of originality and exclusivity: Authors must ensure that their manuscript is entirely original and has not been published previously, nor is it under consideration by another journal. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is strictly prohibited.
Duty to report accurately: Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be accurately represented. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Duty to adhere to ethical guidelines: Authors must have obtained informed consent from participants in their research and must protect participant confidentiality. For studies involving animals or vulnerable populations, appropriate ethical oversight must be confirmed. Please refer to “Publication ethics” (link) and “Research Ethics Policy” (link) sections of journal page.
Duty to disclose conflicts and funding: All authors must disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research project must be disclosed.
Duty to confirm authorship: Authorship must be based on the ICMJE criteria: substantial contributions to conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation; drafting or revising the manuscript critically; final approval of the version to be published; and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. All listed authors must meet these criteria. The use of generative AI tools for content creation does not qualify an AI tool for authorship, and such use must be disclosed.
Duty to engage with the review process: Upon receiving a revise-and-resubmit decision, authors must submit a point-by-point response to the reviewers' and editors' comments, clearly indicating changes made in the revised manuscript (e.g., by highlighting or underlining).
Right to appeal: Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision. Appeals should be directed to the editorial office (info@australasiapublisher.com) with a detailed explanation and supporting documents. Appeals will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Right to withdraw: Authors may request to withdraw their manuscript at any point before acceptance. Upon acceptance, withdrawal is discouraged and is only permitted for compelling reasons, such as the discovery of a critical error.

Handling of Specific Issues

Conflicts of Interest: All participants in the peer review process must declare any competing interests. The journal requires authors to complete a Conflict of Interest form, and such declarations will be published with the article.
Plagiarism and Duplicate Submission: The journal uses iThenticate to screen for plagiarism. Any form of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism and duplicate publication, is considered unethical. The journal follows COPE guidelines in investigating and addressing such misconduct, which may lead to rejection or retraction.
Use of Generative AI: Authors may use AI tools for non-intellectual tasks like language editing. However, AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors are fully responsible for all content and must disclose any AI use in the Acknowledgements or Methods section. Undisclosed or inappropriate use may lead to rejection. Please refer to Publication ethics (link), section “Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts”.
Complaints and Appeals: Any complaints regarding the editorial process should be addressed in writing to the editor-in-chief. The journal follows COPE guidelines for handling complaints. Appeals against editorial decisions are reviewed by the editor-in-chief or an independent editorial board member not involved in the original decision.
Post-Publication Corrections and Retractions: If errors are identified after publication, the journal will issue a correction or erratum. If the findings are invalidated due to misconduct or major error, the article will be retracted. A retraction notice, linked to the original article, will be published in accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines.