Editorial Policy

The editorial policy of the Research Journal in Medicine and Health Sciences (RJMHS) declares the principles of accepting, reviewing and publishing process. The editorial policy of the Research Journal in Medicine and Health Sciences (RJMHS) is based on ethical values and principles in order to avoid any illegal practices, e.g. plagiarism, and to respect the intellectual ownership. Journal editors take the responsibility for:

 providing guidelines to authors for preparing and submitting manuscripts;
 treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty, and transparency;
 protecting the confidentiality of every author’s work;
 establishing a system for effective and rapid peer review;
 informing the authors about the editorial decision regarding the submitted papers rapidly;
 ensuring timely publication of accepted manuscripts


Peer-review policy
Hybrid Journal of Literary and Cultural Studies seeks to provide researchers with rigorous, constructive and timely peer review for their manuscript. The journal's standard peer-review process is double-blind. All research articles submitted to this particular journal are selected for peer review are sent to two or more independent reviewers, selected by the editors. More information on our peer review policy can be obtained through this link.


According to COPE, The term authorship can refer to the creator or originator of an idea (eg, the author of the theory of relativity) or the individual or individuals who develop and bring to fruition the product that disseminates intellectual or creative works (eg, the author of a poem or a scholarly article). Authorship conveys significant privileges, responsibilities, and legal rights; in the scholarly arena, it also forms the basis for rewards and career advancement. Various disciplines have norms, guidelines, and rules governing authorship; some of those rules preserve lineage of ideas or works, conception and production of studies or experiments to validate theory, analysis of outcomes, and the actual writing of work to disseminate knowledge. Authors are accountable for following discipline-specific guidelines when they engage in authorship activities; journal editors and publishers are accountable for making author guidelines transparent and appropriate for the medium (scholarly books, journal articles, creative writing). At a minimum, authors should guarantee that they have done the work as presented and that they have not violated any other author’s legal rights (eg, copyright) in the process.

All named authors sign a statement of authorship as a condition of publication. Such a statement should ideally include:
• A declaration that that person, and all other named authors, fulfil the authorship criteria laid out in
the journal’s authorship policy
• A declaration that no other individuals deserving of authorship have been omitted
• A statement of what exactly that person contributed to the paper (journals should also consider
publishing this information)
• A declaration that that person takes responsibility for the integrity of the paper

Competing interests

Cogent OA has a transparent publications policy and adheres in principle to the Conflict of Interest policy recommended by the COPE. We require that authors declare any relevant competing interests of a personal, professional or financial nature at the time of submission- for example, financial or personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence or bias their work, or could be perceived to do so. It is the responsibility of authors to disclose affiliations with any organization with a financial interest, direct or indirect, in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (such as consultancies, employment, paid expert testimony, honoraria, speakers bureaus, retainers, stock options or ownership, patents or patent applications or travel grants). All sources of funding for research should be explicitly stated. If uncertain as to what might be considered a potential competing interest, authors should err on the side of full disclosure.

Ethics and consent

Corrections and retractions

Cases of suspected misconduct