福利在线免费

• Review articles should present a substantial survey with an adequate historical perspective of the literature in an area of Health Sciences. The manuscript should not exceed the limit of 5,000 words.
• Research papers should be manuscripts comprising complete reports of original, scientifically sound research. They must contribute new knowledge, be prepared for a wide readership and should not exceed 4,000 words.
• Short communications should be brief reports of scientifically sound research, but of limited scope e.g., limited amount of data, that contribute new knowledge. They should not exceed 2,000 words.
• Commentaries should be focused and opinionated articles on any subject within the scope of the Journal. These articles should be related to a contemporary issue, such as recent research findings. They should not exceed 2,000 words.
• Letters to the editor should provide further debate on a topic addressed by a paper published in the Journal and should not exceed 1,000 words. Authors of the manuscript will be sent an edited copy of the letter and they will have the right to reply. 
• Book reviews should be timely and objective. They should discuss and assess the main ideas and major objectives of the book and how effectively these are accomplished. Finally, constructive comments about the strengths and weaknesses of the book should be presented. Book reviews should not exceed 1,000 words.

Prior to manuscript submission, it should be ensured that the Instructions for Authors are adhered to. Manuscripts not conforming to these guidelines may be returned back to the author(s). To ensure that the manuscript submission guidelines have been adhered to, authors are requested to refer to the MJHS Screening Checklist [PDF]. A signed electronic copy of the Manuscripts Submission Agreement [PDF] must be presented with each submission. 

Submission of manuscripts

Manuscripts and the signed Manuscript Submission Agreement are to be emailed to the Editor-in-Chief on mjhs@um.edu.mt. All manuscript co-authors should be copied in this email.

General guidelines

All papers must be written in correct and consistent English (UK). The manuscript, including references, tables and figure legends, should be typed in double line spacing, with margins of at least 25 mm on each side. Text should be standard 10 or 12 pt. Author names and/or affiliations should not appear anywhere in the manuscript pages or images in order to ensure blind peer review. All identifiers need to be removed from submitted files. In Microsoft Word documents, personal information is stored in File Options, which can be edited or removed using the following steps: Trust Centre → Trust Centre Settings → Privacy Options → Document Inspector → Document Properties and Personal 福利在线免费 → Inspect. Continuous line numbers should be added to the whole document (in Microsoft Word: Page Layout → Line Numbers).

Title page 

The full title page should be submitted as a separate document and should include the following:

• Title of paper Abbreviations should not be used in the title.
• Submission category This should be specified as research paper, book review, etc.
• Authors Full names of all authors are to be provided, followed by qualifications, affiliations and addresses. The corresponding author should be identified and full details, including email and postal addresses and telephone numbers, should be provided.
• Running head A running head of not more than 40 characters should be included at the top of the page.

Blind title page 

A blind title page giving only the title without author details should also be submitted.

Abstract 

The abstract should be an accurate summary of the paper presented in one paragraph (not exceeding 300 words). The abstract should: 

• indicate the specific purpose of the article       
• describe the methodology used to achieve the purpose       
• present the findings including key statistics (this section may be omitted for articles that are not data-based)
• present the conclusions based on the data provided 
• highlight the novelty of the work.

The abstract should preferably not include references.

Keywords

Immediately after the abstract, a list of up to 6 keywords is to be included. Selected words and phrases should relate directly to the content of the work.

N.B. The title, abstract and keywords should be chosen carefully by the author(s) as they determine the ease with which readers access the article through online search engines.  

Main text

For research papers and short communications, the article text should consist of the sections outlined below, in the same order. The Results or Findings and Discussion sections could also be combined.  Repetition across sections should be avoided. Abbreviations and acronyms may be used where appropriate but must always be defined at their first mention.

• Introduction: This section should briefly describe the purpose of the work, explain its importance and provide a relevant theoretical background.
• Methods: The research design, the materials and/or participants and the methods used for data collection should be described. Sufficient detail should be provided to allow reproduction of the study design.
• Results or Findings: Results should be presented in a clear and logical sequence. If tables are used, they should not duplicate the data in the text but describe trends and main points.
• Discussion: This should provide an interpretation of the results without repeating them. 
• Conclusions: The main conclusions of the paper are to be presented in this section.
• Acknowledgements (if relevant): Acknowledgements should be collated in a separate section at the end of the article before the References. Please refer to the section on Ethical Guidelines for more information. 

References

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references. All references must appear both in the text and the reference list.

MJHS follows the APA 7th edition style of referencing. For guidance on this referencing style, please refer to the referencing guide.

Tables should be referred to specifically in the text of the article and provided in the same document. They should be in editable Microsoft Word format. Tables should be numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, etc.), in the order in which they appear in the text. Each table should have a short descriptive title, be self-explanatory and not duplicate data given in the text or figures. All columns and rows should be properly aligned. Horizontal rules are to be included at the top and bottom of a table and also below the column headings. If a column heading encompasses two or more subheadings, then the main headings and subheadings should be separated by a single short rule. No other rules, horizontal or vertical, should be included. Appropriate space should be used to separate columns. Rows should be double-spaced. A table may have footnotes if necessary. Each footnote should begin on a new line. Abbreviations in tables should be defined in footnotes even if defined in the text or in a previous table. 

Figures should be referred to specifically in the text of the paper. They should be numbered consecutively using Arabic numerals and avoid repeating material in the text. Abbreviations used in figures should be defined in the caption.  Image files should be supplied in EPS, TIFF, PDF, PPT or JPEG format, with each numbered figure submitted separately and numbered. Unless essential to the content of the article, all illustrations should be supplied in black and white with no colour contained within them. Files should be saved at the appropriate dpi (dots per inch) for the type of graphic; definitely not less than the typical screen value of 72 dpi for both the vertical and horizontal directions. Lower resolutions will not be usable. 

Line drawings should be saved at 800 dpi or 1200 dpi (fine line work) and 300 dpi (halftone and colour work). The image should be cropped to show just the relevant area, while the amount of white space around the illustration should be kept to a minimum. Illustrations should be supplied at the size they are to be printed, usually 76 mm wide (single column of text) or, for large figures, 161 mm wide (two columns of text). All annotations should be included within the images supplied. 

Participant identity must be obscured in all figures. Additional points to note:

• graphs, diagrams or other artwork should not be placed within a box
• background gridlines should be avoided unless essential (e.g., confidence limits)
• lettering should be appropriately sized and should correspond to 8 or 9 pt when printed
• all units of measurement should be included on axes
• all lines (e.g., graph axes) should have a minimum width of ¼ pt (0.1 mm); 1 pt weight is preferable
• use of tints should be avoided; solid black and white or variations of crosshatching are preferred. Any tints used must be at a minimum 5% level to print. Use of too high a tint should be avoided as it may print too dark)
• three-dimensional histograms are not to be used unless the addition of a third dimension gives further information.

Appendices are discouraged if the material can be included in the main text. If an appendix is necessary e.g., mathematical calculations that would disrupt the text, it should be supplied as a separate file. If more than one appendix are included, these should be identified using different letters. An appendix may contain references. Appendices must be referred to in the main text.

Footnotes should be used sparingly. If used, they should be numbered consecutively throughout the paper using superscript Arabic numbers. The reference list should not include footnotes.

A signed electronic copy of the Manuscript Submission Agreement must be presented with manuscripts upon submission. Prior to manuscript submission, it should be ensured that the journal guidelines are adhered to. To ensure that the manuscript submission guidelines [PDF] have been adhered to, authors are requested to refer to the MJHS Screening Checklist [PDF]

The Malta Journal of Health Sciences (MJHS) is a peer-reviewed academic journal. All manuscripts submitted for consideration undergo a rigorous evaluation process to ensure high academic and ethical standards.

MJHS employs a blind peer review system. Each eligible manuscript is evaluated by independent reviewers (normally two) who are experts in the relevant field and/or methodology. Reviewers are not members of the journal’s editorial staff.

Review Procedure

1. Initial Editorial Screening
   • Upon submission, manuscripts are screened by a member of the editorial team to confirm that they fall within the journal’s scope, meet ethical standards, comply with submission guidelines and a similarity detection via Turnitin is also conducted
     
     
2. Peer Review
   • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are then sent to two independent reviewers with relevant subject and/or methodological
   • Reviewers are asked to complete a structured review form, providing feedback on the manuscript’s originality, methodological soundness, clarity, ethical considerations, and overall contribution to the field, making recommendations to the editor-in-chief. Recommendations include accept, minor revisions, major revisions or reject.
     
     
3. Editorial Decision
   • The Editor-in-Chief considers the reviewers’ reports and recommendations before making the final decision: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.

Timeframe

The editorial decision is normally reached within two months of submission. In exceptional circumstances, such as force majeure or challenges to find reviewers, this timeframe may be extended.

Revisions

When revisions are required, authors are granted up to 30 days to resubmit their revised work. Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by reviewers to ensure all issues raised have been addressed.

Editorial Integrity

No Guarantee of Acceptance: MJHS does not guarantee the acceptance of any manuscript. Every submission must undergo a formal evaluation process, and acceptance is strictly contingent upon the manuscript meeting the journal's standards for scientific soundness, academic quality, and logical structure.

Realistic Peer-Review Timelines: The journal does not offer expedited review tracks or guarantee short review times. We prioritize a thorough, high-quality review process over speed to ensure the "excellence" of the published work.

Independent Review Process: All research articles are subjected to a peer-review system where advice is obtained from expert reviewers in the field who are independent of the journal’s editorial staff. This ensures that evaluations are objective and free from internal bias.

Merit-Based Decision Making: All editorial decisions are based exclusively on the academic merit, relevance to the journal's scope, and the quality of the research. Decisions are made independently of the authors' affiliations and are not influenced by revenue sources, institutional support, or the payment of any potential fees.

Final Authority: The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board hold final authority over the content published, ensuring that all articles are consistent with the journal's stated Aims and Scope

The MJHS is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. COPE flowcharts are followed for handling allegations of misconduct and post-publication issues. 

1.   Duties of Authors:

Authorship and Contributorship: Authorship should reflect substantial contributions to the work, approval of the final version, and accountability of the content. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Where there are others who have participated in certain aspects such as language editing, they should be recognised in the acknowledgements section. Transparent contributorship is encouraged in all manuscripts (e.g. CRediT taxonomy), or ICMJE’s authorship criteria.  

Conflicts of Interest (COI): All authors must declare relevant financial and non-financial competing interests and specify funding sources using a standard disclosure. 

Data sharing and reproducibility: Authors must include a Data Availability Statement and share underlying data, code and materials where legal and ethical to do so, or state justified restrictions and access routes. 

Ethical considerations: Studies involving humans require prior ethics approval and informed consent. Animal studies also require approved welfare standards and compliance with ARRIVE guidelines, besides ethics approval. Manuscripts must include a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee. The statement should contain the date and reference number of the ethical approval/s obtained.

Intellectual Property: By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that the work is original, does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property rights, and has not been published elsewhere. Authors also warrant that all necessary permissions have been obtained for the use of copyrighted or proprietary material (figures, tables, datasets, survey tools etc). AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors must ensure that any AI-assisted material does not infringe copyright and must disclose its use. Responsibility for securing rights to AI-assisted content rests fully with the authors.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies should only be used in the writing process to improve the readability and language of the manuscript.

All authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by including a formal declaration in a dedicated section entitled 'Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process'. This section must be placed at the end of the manuscript, immediately preceding the References list. This requirement applies to all submissions. Authors must either confirm the non-use of these tools or specify the tool used and the nature of its application. Please note that the authors remain fully responsible for the scientific integrity and accuracy of the final work.

2.   Duties of Editors and Advisory Board:

Allegations (e.g. plagiarism, fabrication of data, image manipulation, authorship disputes, undisclosed COI) are handled as per COPE flowcharts; and as explained below.

3.   Duties of Reviewers:

Reviewers must decline performing the review process if there is a COI or insufficient expertise.

Process for Identification of Research Misconduct

The MJHS is committed to upholding the highest standards of research integrity and publication ethics. 

Specifically for the identification of misconduct:

• All submissions are subject to plagiarism screening using Turnitin.
• Editors and reviewers are instructed to report any concerns related to data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication (on another journal or another language), image manipulation, inappropriate authorship, or ethical approval issues.
• The editorial office may request original data, images or documentation to verify the integrity of the research.  

Process for handling allegations:

• Allegations are assessed initially by the Editor-in-Chief.
• Minor issues (e.g. citation errors) are corrected during revision. 
• Serious concerns trigger a formal investigation, coordinated by the Editor-in-Chief, following COPE guidelines and best practices.
• The authors are contacted formally and are given the opportunity to respond. 

If misconduct is confirmed, the journal may:

• Reject the manuscript without further consideration for publication, or if already published, the manuscript is to be retracted
• Publish a correction, retraction or expression of concern
• Notify the author’s institution or funding body

The journal reserves the right to refuse submissions from authors found to have committed serious research misconduct in the past.

Post-publication discussions and corrections: Published articles that contain errors affecting interpretation will be corrected with a linked notice. Where concerns are under investigation, we may issue an expression of concern. When retractions occur, these remain linked to the original record for transparency and follow COPE retraction guidelines.