Editor's Guidelines
The Annals of Clinical Hypertension (ACH) entrusts its editors with the vital responsibility of upholding scholarly integrity, ensuring timely and rigorous peer review, and safeguarding the fairness of the editorial process. These guidelines serve as a framework for editors in maintaining the journal’s mission of advancing clinical hypertension research while adhering to international publishing standards such as those outlined by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and ICMJE.
Editors act as custodians of scientific quality. Their role includes making impartial decisions, ensuring confidentiality, and managing peer review with efficiency and integrity.
1. Manuscript Handling
-
Conduct initial screening for scope, quality, and compliance with journal guidelines.
-
Assign submissions to appropriate associate editors or reviewers based on expertise.
-
Ensure timely communication with authors regarding manuscript status and decisions.
2. Peer Review Management
-
Select reviewers based on subject expertise, absence of conflicts of interest, and reliability.
-
Ensure that peer review remains constructive, unbiased, and confidential.
-
Monitor reviewer performance and maintain a database of qualified reviewers.
Final editorial decisions must be based on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance to the field of clinical hypertension. Decisions must never be influenced by authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, race, or personal characteristics.
3. Ethical Standards
-
Editors must identify and address suspected misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication) following COPE flowcharts.
-
They must require disclosure of conflicts of interest from authors and ensure these are transparently reported.
-
Editors must recuse themselves from decisions where a conflict of interest exists.
4. Confidentiality
Editors must treat all manuscripts and related communications as confidential. Information should only be shared with individuals directly involved in the peer review and publication process. Unpublished data from submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal research purposes.
5. Communication with Authors
Editors must ensure that authors receive clear, timely, and constructive feedback throughout the review cycle. In cases of rejection, reasons must be communicated respectfully and with enough detail to support authors in future submissions.
- Editors’ decisions must be free from commercial or political influence.
- Advertisements, sponsorships, or institutional affiliations must not bias editorial judgment.
- ACH maintains full separation between editorial and business operations.
6. Appeals and Complaints
Editors must oversee a fair and transparent process for handling appeals and complaints. Authors may appeal editorial decisions or raise ethical concerns, which should be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, if necessary, referred to the editorial board or COPE.
7. Continuous Professional Development
Editors are encouraged to remain informed about evolving standards in publishing ethics, peer review innovations, and research integrity practices. Participation in editorial training, COPE workshops, and peer review forums is highly recommended.
Editors must always uphold fairness, impartiality, and integrity. The credibility of ACH depends upon the responsible exercise of editorial judgment.