Policy Document

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) is a peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal committed to advancing the frontiers of knowledge in the interconnected domains of health sciences, rehabilitation, allied medical fields, and evidence-based practice. As a flagship publication under Health and Research Insights, IJARP provides an authoritative platform for disseminating high-impact research, innovative clinical applications, theoretical advancements, and interdisciplinary knowledge essential for improving healthcare delivery and health outcomes worldwide.

IJARP was established with the core mission of fostering scientific excellence and bridging the gap between research, clinical practice, and policy development. In alignment with international publishing standards, the journal maintains a rigorous editorial and peer-review framework to ensure that each published manuscript contributes meaningfully to the growing body of global knowledge. The journal prioritizes scholarly integrity, methodological rigor, and transparent reporting, following ethical guidelines set by COPE, ICMJE, WAME, and the Declaration of Helsinki.

The journal's readership includes clinicians, researchers, rehabilitation specialists, academics, policymakers, and students who rely on validated evidence and comprehensive analysis to inform practice and decision-making. By embracing technological innovation, methodological diversity, and global perspectives, IJARP stands as a hub for transformative thought and scholarly advancement.

Key features of IJARP include:

Rigorous double-blind peer review, ensuring unbiased evaluation.
Open-access publication model, promoting unrestricted dissemination of knowledge.
Multidisciplinary scope, covering medical sciences, rehabilitation, public health, allied health sciences, and applied clinical practice.
Commitment to research integrity, transparency, and reproducibility.
Inclusive authorship, encouraging contributions from diverse regions, research backgrounds, and professional levels.
Continuous improvement, aligning with evolving international publishing standards and innovations in scholarly dissemination.

The journal publishes a range of manuscript types, including original research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, methodological papers, case studies, qualitative research, conference proceedings, and advanced scientific hypotheses. Through this multidimensional approach, IJARP contributes to shaping the future of healthcare and rehabilitation sciences by disseminating research that is both impactful and actionable.

IJARP serves as more than a repository of academic articles; it functions as a scholarly ecosystem that nurtures critical thinking, scientific communication, clinical innovation, and professional development. The journal’s strategic goal is to advance high-quality, ethically sound, and clinically relevant research that informs current practice, challenges existing paradigms, and paves the way for evidence-based transformation across global health sectors.

AIMS AND SCOPE

Aims

The core aim of IJARP is to establish itself as a globally recognized leader in the publication of scientifically rigorous, clinically meaningful, and methodologically advanced research across health and rehabilitation sciences. The journal strives to:

Promote Innovation and Excellence in Research
Publish high-quality, novel research that advances theoretical understanding, clinical practice, and interdisciplinary integration in healthcare and rehabilitation.
Bridge Research and Practice
Translate robust scientific evidence into practical applications that enhance clinical outcomes, therapeutic interventions, and health system functionality.
Support Knowledge Dissemination Across Disciplines
Offer a diverse platform for sharing insights from medical science, rehabilitation, public health, community health, allied health sciences, and related fields.
Strengthen Evidence-Based Practice Globally
Support practitioners and policymakers by providing scientifically validated evidence that contributes to better patient management and health policy formation.
Encourage Methodological Diversity
Welcome both quantitative and qualitative research designs, including randomized controlled trials, observational studies, qualitative inquiries, mixed-methods research, laboratory studies, and clinical audits.
Uphold Research Ethics, Transparency, and Integrity
Ensure strict compliance with global ethical frameworks, plagiarism prevention, data transparency, and responsible reporting of research.
Provide a Platform for Emerging Scholars
Encourage participation from early-career researchers and provide them with an inclusive, supportive platform to publish impactful work.

Scope

Reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of modern healthcare, IJARP embraces a broad and inclusive scope structured across several domains:

Medical Sciences

Internal medicine, surgery, and diagnostic sciences
Clinical trials, treatment outcomes, and therapeutic innovations
Medical imaging, radiology, and diagnostic technology
Pharmacology, drug development, and therapeutic innovations
Pathophysiology and interdisciplinary biomedical research

Rehabilitation Sciences

Physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech-language therapy
Advanced rehabilitative technologies
Biomechanics, movement science, and functional recovery
Neurorehabilitation, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and community-based rehabilitation
Assistive devices and rehabilitative robotics

Public Health and Epidemiology

Health promotion, disease prevention, and health behaviour
Population health management and chronic disease epidemiology
Environmental and occupational health
Health services research and policy evaluation
Community-based interventions and health equity

Community Health and Wellness

Preventive health strategies
Lifestyle medicine and holistic wellness
Community interventions for disease prevention
Social determinants of health and community psychology

Allied Health Sciences

Nutrition sciences
Radiologic sciences
Podiatry, respiratory therapy, and cardiovascular rehabilitation
Laboratory sciences and bioinformatics

Dental and Oral Health Research

Prosthodontics, periodontology, endodontics, and orthodontics
Maxillofacial surgery, oral pathology, and oral public health
Dental materials and technological advancements in oral care

Clinical Implementation and Evidence Synthesis

Implementation science in healthcare settings
Evidence synthesis including systematic reviews, scoping reviews, meta-analyses
Audits, clinical guidelines, and quality-improvement studies

Qualitative and Mixed-Method Research

Patient experiences, practitioner perspectives, and sociocultural health influences
Interpretive and constructivist methodologies
Grounded theory, phenomenology, thematic analysis, and narrative research

Theoretical and Hypothesis-Driven Research

Emerging theories, conceptual frameworks, and analytic models in health sciences
Hypothesis papers that propose new directions for future research

IJARP remains committed to expanding its scope in response to evolving healthcare challenges, technological innovations, and global research trends.

FREQUENCY OF THE JOURNAL

IJARP operates as a biannual (two issues per year) peer-reviewed journal, maintaining a consistent and transparent publication schedule aligned with international scholarly publishing standards. The biannual frequency ensures focused editorial attention, rigorous peer review, and the publication of high-quality research across its specialized domains.

Biannual Publication Cycle (2025)

IJARP adopted a biannual publication model beginning in January 2025 and continues to follow the same schedule. Each year includes two issues, published as follows:

Issue 1: July
Issue 2: December

This structured frequency supports:

Thorough and efficient peer-review processes
High editorial quality and scientific rigor
Predictable timelines for authors, reviewers, and indexing bodies
Sustainable and quality-focused journal growth

TIMELINES OF PUBLICATION OF ISSUES

IJARP follows clear and transparent timelines to uphold timely scholarly communication. The journal publishes both biannual issues at the end of their respective months.

Biannual Publication Timeline (2025–Present)

July Issue: Published between July 25–31
December Issue: Published between December 25–31

These standardized timelines ensure:

Smooth editorial planning
Timely dissemination of accepted manuscripts
Consistency for indexing and archiving
Transparent communication with authors and reviewers

IJARP remains committed to maintaining its biannual schedule while ensuring that each issue upholds the highest standards of editorial integrity, scientific rigor, and academic excellence.

PEER REVIEW POLICY & PROCESS

Introduction

The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) upholds a rigorous and transparent peer-review process that aligns with the highest international standards in scholarly publishing. Peer review is the cornerstone of academic integrity, ensuring that published work is original, methodologically sound, ethically conducted, and contributes meaningfully to global scientific knowledge. The journal follows the principles outlined by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors), WAME, and the Council of Science Editors (CSE) when evaluating submissions.

IJARP employs a double-blind peer review system, where neither the reviewers nor the authors know each other's identities. This mechanism minimizes bias, fosters objectivity, and enables a fair assessment of the work regardless of author identity, institutional affiliation, or country of origin.

Objectives of the Peer Review System

The peer-review process aims to:

Ensure Scientific Rigor
Validate the accuracy of methodology, data interpretation, and conclusions.
Maintain Editorial Quality
Evaluate structure, clarity, relevance, and adherence to academic writing norms.
Promote Ethical Research
Assess compliance with ethical standards for human/animal studies, data protection, and informed consent.
Enhance Manuscript Quality
Provide constructive, actionable feedback that improves the manuscript prior to publication.
Protect the Scientific Record
Identify plagiarism, data fabrication, conflicts of interest, duplicate submission, and other misconduct.
Facilitate Expert Evaluation
Engage specialized reviewers who bring discipline-specific insight and methodological expertise.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

Stage 1: Initial Editorial Screening (Desk Review)

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo a preliminary evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to assess:

Relevance to IJARP’s aims and scope
Originality and significance
Clarity and coherence
Compliance with formatting and author guidelines
Ethical and methodological checks
Plagiarism screening using Turnitin or similar software

Manuscripts failing to meet minimum standards may be desk rejected with constructive editorial comments. Others proceed to the peer-review stage.

Stage 2: Reviewer Selection

IJARP maintains a diverse and multidisciplinary database of qualified reviewers, including:

Senior academicians
Clinical experts
Allied health professionals
Public health researchers
Methodologists and statisticians

Reviewers are selected based on:

Subject expertise
Research experience
Publication track record
Ethical conduct and reliability
Absence of conflict of interest with the authors

Each manuscript is reviewed by two independent reviewers, and when necessary, a third reviewer adjudicates conflicting recommendations.

Stage 3: Double-Blind Peer Review

The double-blind process protects confidentiality and ensures objectivity:

Authors’ identities are removed from the manuscript.
Reviewers receive anonymized files.
Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest before accepting review assignments.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript using standardized criteria addressing:

Originality and contribution to knowledge
Appropriateness of research design
Quality and reproducibility of methods
Statistical and analytical rigor
Validity of results and conclusions
Overall structure, language, and clarity
Ethical compliance and participant protection
Quality of tables, figures, and visual data

Reviewers provide:

Detailed comments for authors
Confidential comments for the editor
A clear recommendation

Accept
Minor revision
Major revision
Reject

Stage 4: Editorial Decision

The editor synthesizes reviewer feedback and makes one of the following decisions:

Accept: The manuscript meets all requirements with minimal changes.
Minor Revision: Limited revisions needed; author guidance provided.
Major Revision: Substantial methodological or conceptual revisions required.
Reject: Manuscript does not meet scientific or ethical standards.

Revised manuscripts may undergo re-review depending on the depth of revisions.

Stage 5: Final Acceptance and Pre-Publication Checks

Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes:

Language and grammar editing
Formatting and reference verification
Cross-checking of figures, tables, and data presentation
Compliance verification with ethical and reporting guidelines
Final approval from the Editor-in-Chief

This ensures that the published article reflects the highest scholarly standards.

Criteria for Reviewer Selection and Accountability

Reviewers are expected to:

Demonstrate subject-matter expertise
Provide unbiased, constructive feedback
Maintain confidentiality
Decline review if unqualified or conflicted
Complete reviews within the assigned timeline
Identify ethical concerns or misconduct

Failure to follow reviewer ethics can result in removal from the reviewer pool.

Confidentiality and Integrity

IJARP strictly enforces confidentiality during peer review:

Reviewers cannot use or share unpublished content.
Manuscript details cannot be discussed externally.
Reviewers must destroy all manuscript files after review completion.

Misuse of confidential information constitutes academic misconduct.

Prevention of Peer-Review Manipulation

The journal uses safeguards to prevent unethical practices such as:

Fake reviewer identities
Author-suggested reviewer fraud
Undisclosed conflicts of interest
Coordinated citation schemes

Verification methods include:

Institutional email authentication
ORCID checks
Editorial oversight
Reviewer identity validation

STANDARD REVIEWER'S GUIDELINES

To promote consistency, fairness, and scholarly rigor, IJARP provides a structured set of guidelines that reviewers must follow.

General Principles for Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Approach reviews with professionalism and courtesy
Evaluate manuscripts objectively and without bias
Offer detailed and actionable comments
Avoid personal criticism
Treat all materials as confidential
Adhere to review deadlines

Key Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers must assess:

Originality and Contribution

Does the work add meaningful value to existing knowledge?
Is the research question important and clearly stated?

Scientific and Methodological Quality

Appropriateness of study design
Clarity of research objective and hypotheses
Validity of sampling, methodology, and measurements
Appropriateness of statistical or qualitative analysis
Reproducibility and transparency of methods

Ethical Standards

Ethics approval for human/animal studies
Informed consent
Data protection compliance
Participant confidentiality

Quality of Results and Discussion

Logical presentation
Depth and accuracy of analysis
Balanced interpretation
Limitations acknowledged
Alignment between data and conclusions

Writing Quality and Presentation

Clarity, structure, grammar
Quality of figures and tables
Proper citation and adherence to Vancouver referencing style

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers must classify decisions as:

Accept
Minor revision
Major revision
Reject

Each recommendation must be justified with clear reasons.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Declare conflicts of interest
Avoid reviewing manuscripts where they have personal, academic, or financial ties
Report suspected misconduct (plagiarism, data manipulation, unethical studies)
Maintain objectivity, confidentiality, and integrity

ORIGINALITY AND PLAGIARISM POLICY

IJARP is committed to safeguarding academic integrity and ensures that all published content is original, ethically produced, and free from academic misconduct.

Plagiarism Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo plagiarism checking using Turnitin or similar software.

Acceptable similarity index: <20%
Excluded from similarity calculation: references, standard methodological descriptions, institutional boilerplate language

Manuscripts exceeding thresholds are returned for revision or rejected.

Forms of Plagiarism Considered Unacceptable

Verbatim copying without citation
Self-plagiarism (duplicate or redundant publication)
Data plagiarism
Image manipulation
Improper paraphrasing
Salami slicing (segmenting one study into multiple publications)

Procedures for Handling Plagiarism

If plagiarism is suspected:

Editors conduct a detailed review
Authors are notified with evidence
Authors must provide explanation or correction
Severe cases lead to

Immediate rejection
Reporting to affiliated institutions
Restriction on future submissions
Retraction if already published

Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication

IJARP prohibits simultaneous submission to multiple journals.

Authors must ensure:

Manuscripts are original
Results have not been previously published
Prior conference abstracts or preprints are transparently declared

SUBSCRIPTION DETAILS

IJARP adheres to a full open-access model, ensuring that all content is freely accessible without subscription fees. The journal follows the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), permitting free distribution, reproduction, and adaptation with appropriate credit.

Open Access Philosophy

Promotes equitable global access
Supports authors from low- and middle-income regions
Enhances citation impact and visibility

All articles are accessible without login or payment.

No Subscription Fees

No fees for readers
No institutional or personal subscription requirements
Unlimited access to archived issues

Digital Archiving & Indexing Accessibility

IJARP ensures long-term preservation through:

LOCKSS and CLOCKSS
Institutional repositories
DOI assignment for each article

Benefits for Institutions and Libraries

Libraries may:

Link IJARP content freely
Integrate articles into repositories
Use materials for academic teaching with citation

JOURNAL OPERATIONS

Overview of Editorial and Operational Philosophy

The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) operates under a structured, transparent, and ethically grounded publishing framework aligned with international scholarly communication practices. The journal’s operational system is designed to ensure:

Scientific rigor and integrity in all published work
Efficient editorial and peer-review workflow
Transparency in decision-making
Ethical conduct at every stage of publication
Accessibility and global dissemination of high-quality research
Accountability through monitoring, record-keeping, and continuous improvement

IJARP’s operations integrate advanced editorial management systems, digital preservation protocols, and open-access distribution models to provide authors, reviewers, editors, and readers with a seamless and accountable publishing experience.

Governance Structure

IJARP functions under a well-defined organizational structure composed of:

Editorial Leadership

Editor-in-Chief: Oversees editorial vision, ensures scientific integrity, and approves final publication decisions.
Associate Editors: Assist with manuscript evaluation, reviewer selection, and subject-specific editorial oversight.
Section Editors: Manage specialized areas such as rehabilitation sciences, medical sciences, allied health sciences, and public health.
Editorial Board Members: Provide expert consultation, strategic development, and review support.

The governance hierarchy ensures distributing responsibilities and maintaining quality control.

Editorial Workflow and Management

IJARP uses a standardized digital platform for:

Manuscript submission
Reviewer assignment
Editorial screening
Revision tracking
Author communication
Quality control and production processes

Editorial workflow includes:

Submission → Automated acknowledgment
Desk Screening → Quality, relevance, ethics, formatting checks
Double-Blind Peer Review → Reviewer assignment and evaluation
Revision Cycle → Minor or major revisions
Final Acceptance → Validation of quality and ethics
Proofreading & Production → Formatting, metadata, XML conversion
Online Publication → DOI assignment and archiving

Quality Assurance Mechanisms

IJARP incorporates multiple quality-control layers:

Plagiarism checks using Turnitin
Technical review for structure, language, referencing
Statistical review for quantitative studies
Ethical compliance assessment
Cross-checking with reporting guidelines (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ)

The journal continuously updates its workflow in response to emerging trends in academic publishing.

Archiving and Digital Preservation

To ensure long-term accessibility and preservation, IJARP participates in:

LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)
CLOCKSS
Institutional repositories
Digital Object Identifiers (DOI)

Each article is preserved as part of an international, distributed archival system.

Transparency in Journal Administration

IJARP adheres to international transparency standards:

Editorial board identities and qualifications are publicly available
Peer-review policy and journal workflow are clearly described
APCs and waiver policies are disclosed
Copyright, licensing, and reuse rights are accessible
Ethical and COI policies are publicly stated

The journal participates in global transparency initiatives such as DOAJ’s Transparency and Best Practices criteria.

Inclusivity and Global Participation

The journal actively:

Encourages submissions from researchers in low- and middle-income countries
Engages diverse reviewers and editorial members
Ensures gender balance and equal opportunity
Promotes emerging voices while upholding quality

Inclusivity strengthens IJARP’s global academic footprint.

ETHICS STATEMENT

Ethical Principles

IJARP is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in accordance with:

COPE Ethical Guidelines
ICMJE Recommendations
Declaration of Helsinki
WAME Principles of Transparency
Singapore Statement on Research Integrity

These frameworks govern authorship, research ethics, participant protection, publication conduct, and editorial responsibility.

Ethical Consent Requirements
Human Participant Research

Authors must:

Obtain approval from a recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Clearly state the IRB reference number
Ensure written informed consent from participants
Protect anonymity and personal data in accordance with privacy laws

Vulnerable Populations

Special protection measures are required when research involves:

Children and adolescents
Individuals with cognitive impairment
Elderly patients dependent on care
People with limited decision-making capacity

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials must follow:

CONSORT reporting guidelines
Trial registration in recognized registries
Ethical monitoring and safety reporting

Animal Research Ethics

Studies involving animals must comply with:

International animal welfare regulations
The 3Rs Principle: Reduction, Replacement, Refinement
Accreditation from institutional animal ethics boards

Ethical Compliance Statement

Authors must include an Ethical Compliance Statement confirming:

Ethical approvals obtained
Informed consent
Data privacy adherence
No exploitation of participants
Compliance with regional and international standards

Manuscripts failing ethical requirements are rejected outright.

MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

IJARP maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward publication malpractice. Academic misconduct includes:

Plagiarism
Self-plagiarism
Data fabrication or falsification
Duplicate submission
Authorship manipulation
Peer-review interference
Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Procedures for Handling Misconduct

If misconduct is suspected:

Initial Inquiry: Editorial team conducts an evidence-based investigation
Author Notification: Authors are contacted with detailed concerns
Response Evaluation: Authors must respond within a defined timeline
Decision:

Minor issues → corrections
Significant issues → rejection
Severe breaches → retraction and institutional notification

All investigations follow COPE flowcharts.

PRIVACY STATEMENT

IJARP respects the confidentiality and data privacy rights of authors, reviewers, and readers.

Collection of Personal Data

The journal collects limited personal information including:

Name
Institutional affiliation
Email address
ORCID ID
Reviewer expertise

This data is used solely for:

Editorial correspondence
Peer-review management
Authorship verification
Journal updates

Data Confidentiality

IJARP ensures:

Protection against unauthorized access
Secure server storage
Restricted staff access
Encryption of sensitive communication
No distribution of personal information to external parties

Data Usage

Personal data is used only for scholarly and journal-related purposes:

Initiating review requests
Notifying authors of decisions
Maintaining reviewer databases
Managing editorial workflows

The journal never sells or trades user data.

User Rights

Individuals have the right to:

Request access to their personal data
Rectify inaccuracies
Request deletion of their information
Withdraw consent for non-essential communication

Data removal will not affect historical records tied to published work.

Compliance with Privacy Laws

The journal complies with:

GDPR standards (where applicable)
Local and international data protection laws

COPYRIGHTS STATEMENT

Author Copyright Retention

IJARP operates under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Authors retain copyright over their work and grant the journal a non-exclusive license to:

Publish
Distribute
Archive
Index the article

Licensing Terms (CC BY 4.0)

Under CC BY 4.0, users may:

Share the work freely
Adapt, remix, or build upon it
Use it for commercial or non-commercial purposes

Provided they:

Give proper attribution
Do not imply endorsement
Link to the license
Indicate if changes were made

This licensing model promotes open knowledge dissemination.

Third-Party Content

Authors must:

Obtain permissions for copyrighted materials
Provide acknowledgments for images, charts, or proprietary tools
Ensure third-party content complies with fair-use laws or license terms

Copyright Infringement

If infringement is detected:

Manuscript may be rejected
Previously published articles may be retracted
Legal actions may be initiated by copyright owners

DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

Introduction

The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) is firmly committed to protecting the credibility of the scientific record. Transparency is a fundamental component of responsible scholarly communication. Disclosure of conflicts of interest (COI) allows readers to evaluate the objectivity and independence of research findings. IJARP’s COI policy aligns with leading international standards, including those of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

A “conflict of interest” arises when an individual’s professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as research validity, editorial responsibility, or peer-review judgment) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain, personal relationships, academic competition, or professional rivalry).

Principles of Transparency

IJARP requires authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and publishers to declare all potential conflicts of interest. These include—whether perceived or actual—relations that could bias or appear to bias:

Study design
Data collection and interpretation
Manuscript writing
Decision to submit for publication
Editorial and peer-review decisions

Transparency enables readers to interpret findings in light of potential biases, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the scientific record.

Types of Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:

3.1 Financial Conflicts

Employment or consultancy
Stock ownership or equity interest
Research funding or grants
Paid travel, lodging, or speaking fees
Patents, royalties, or licensing agreements
Financial incentives from pharmaceutical, medical device, or technology companies

3.2 Personal or Professional Conflicts

Personal relationships with authors or competitors
Academic rivalry
Institutional affiliations influencing objectivity
Political or religious beliefs affecting data interpretation

3.3 Intellectual Conflicts

Strong personal beliefs about theories, scientific debates, or methodologies
Prior public statements or advocacy on the topic
Leadership roles in organizations related to the research field

3.4 Institutional Conflicts

Institutional pressures affecting publication outcomes
Journal governance influences
Organizational sponsorship of research

Responsibilities of Authors

All corresponding authors must submit a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form during manuscript submission. Authors must:

Disclose all financial and non-financial relationships that may influence the work.
Clearly identify all funding sources in the “Funding Disclosure” section.
Declare that the manuscript has not been influenced by the funding agency in terms of study design, interpretation, or publication decision.
State “No conflicts of interest to declare” if applicable.

Failure to disclose conflicts may:

Delay publication
Result in manuscript rejection
Lead to future submission bans
Result in retraction of published work

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers must:

Decline review if they have a conflict of interest
Declare potential conflicts to the editor
Avoid evaluating manuscripts authored by colleagues, collaborators, competitors, or personal acquaintances

If a reviewer is unsure about a conflict, they should contact the editorial office for guidance.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors and editorial board members must:

Refrain from handling manuscripts where conflicts exist
Disclose any potential conflicts annually
Reassign handling roles to maintain objectivity
Maintain independence from financial and institutional pressures

Editors must base all decisions on manuscript quality and scientific merit.

Conflict Management Process

When potential conflicts are identified:

Disclosure Review: The editorial team reviews the declared conflicts.
Mitigation: Manuscripts are reassigned to impartial editors or reviewers.
Transparency: Relevant conflicts are published alongside the article.
Inquiries: COPE guidelines are followed to investigate undeclared conflicts.

Public Disclosure

If the article is accepted, IJARP publishes conflict disclosure statements clearly at the end of the article under the heading:

“Conflict of Interest: The authors declare…”

CORRECTION AND RETRACTION OF RESEARCH ARTICLES

Commitment to Integrity

IJARP is dedicated to preserving the accuracy, transparency, and reliability of the scientific record. When errors, ethical breaches, or post-publication concerns arise, corrective actions are taken following COPE Retraction Guidelines and international standards.

Types of Post-Publication Issues

2.1 Minor Errors

These include:

Typographical mistakes
Formatting errors
Minor inconsistencies that do not affect interpretation

These are corrected through Errata without retracting the article.

2.2 Major Errors

These involve:

Methodological inaccuracies
Incorrect data analysis
Missing ethical approvals
Misrepresentation of results

Such errors require a Corrigendum or, when responsibility lies with the journal, a Publisher’s Correction.

Retractions

A retraction is issued when:

Data is fabricated, falsified, or manipulated
Plagiarism or duplicate publication is confirmed
Ethical standards for human or animal research were violated
Authorship disputes reveal misconduct
Conflicts of interest were intentionally concealed
Research is proven unreliable

Retractions:

Are clearly identified and linked to the original article
Explain the reason and responsible party
Do not erase the original article (to preserve transparency)
Are indexed and citable according to COPE guidance

Withdrawal Policy

Authors may request withdrawal before publication only under valid circumstances:

Significant errors found by the authors
Ethical concerns
Incorrect submission

Post-acceptance withdrawal is discouraged and may require justification and editorial approval.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when:

Investigations are ongoing
Allegations lack definitive evidence
Legal limitations prevent immediate retraction

This ensures transparency while protecting all parties.

Article Replacement

When corrections cannot remedy the issue, but the corrected research is essential:

A retraction is issued
A revised and validated version may be published as a Replacement Article
Both versions remain accessible and clearly identified

Retraction Procedure

Complaint received (from authors, reviewers, or readers)
Editorial screening
COPE-compliant investigation
Opportunity for authors to respond
Final decision by Editor-in-Chief & ethics committee
Public issuance of retraction or correction

ADHERENCE TO COMMUNITY STANDARDS

Commitment to Scholarly Community Values

IJARP recognizes its obligation to uphold the highest standards of ethical scholarship, professional conduct, and inclusive participation within the global academic community. The journal’s Community Standards draw upon:

COPE Core Practices
ICMJE Ethical Principles
UNESCO values for scientific integrity
WAME Principles of Transparency
OASPA Open Access Publishing Guidelines

These standards apply to all stakeholders—authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and readers.

Core Community Values

2.1 Integrity

All research must be conducted, analyzed, and reported with honesty and accuracy. Misconduct is not tolerated.

2.2 Transparency

Methods, results, and potential influencing factors must be reported clearly. Hidden agendas or selective reporting violate IJARP policy.

2.3 Inclusivity and Diversity

IJARP welcomes submissions irrespective of:

Geography
Gender identity
Professional background
Institutional affiliation
Career stage

The journal maintains editorial and reviewer diversity to support equitable representation.

2.4 Respect and Collegiality

All communication, feedback, and scholarly interactions must be conducted professionally and respectfully.

Standards for Authors

Authors must:

Present data honestly
Avoid plagiarism and redundant publication
Ensure ethical research conduct
Accurately credit contributions
Share data transparently when possible
Be responsive during revision cycles
Avoid defamatory or discriminatory content
Respect privacy and confidentiality

Standards for Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Provide fair, unbiased, and constructive evaluations
Declare conflicts of interest
Avoid hostile or unprofessional language
Meet deadlines or decline reviews promptly
Maintain confidentiality
Promote scientific integrity

Failure to adhere may lead to removal from the reviewer database.

Standards for Editors

Editors must:

Uphold impartiality
Protect the peer-review process
Handle all manuscripts fairly
Address ethical concerns transparently
Avoid coercive citation practices
Not use unpublished information for personal benefit

Research Accessibility Standards

IJARP supports open science principles:

Free access to published articles
Encouragement of data sharing
Transparent methodology reporting
Inclusion of preprint-friendly policies

Community Participation and Collaboration

IJARP encourages academic community engagement through:

Promotion of scholarly debate
Participation in surveys and collective editorial improvements
Mentorship opportunities for early-career researchers
Inclusion of global perspectives

Enforcement of Community Standards

Violations of community standards may result in:

Manuscript rejection
Reviewer or editor removal
Retraction or correction of published articles
Notification to institutions
Future submission bans

All cases follow COPE working procedures.

EDITOR SELECTION POLICY

Introduction

The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) recognizes that the strength and credibility of a scholarly journal depend fundamentally on the expertise, integrity, and independence of its editorial leadership. The Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Section Editors, and Editorial Board Members collectively shape the journal’s academic direction, uphold scientific rigor, safeguard editorial ethics, and ensure transparent and equitable publication practices.

This Editor Selection Policy establishes a clear, merit-based, unbiased, and internationally compliant framework for the appointment, evaluation, continuation, and removal of editorial team members. It adheres strictly to standards set by:

COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)
WAME (World Association of Medical Editors)
ICMJE
OASPA and DOAJ Transparency Standards
CSE (Council of Science Editors)

The objective is to maintain a high-caliber editorial board that reflects global diversity, disciplinary expertise, and unwavering academic responsibility.

Guiding Principles of Editorial Selection

2.1 Academic Excellence

Editorial members must possess a distinguished academic record, with:

Consistent publication in reputable peer-reviewed journals
Demonstrated expertise in health, rehabilitation, allied sciences, or related disciplines
Recognition within relevant professional or academic communities

2.2 Ethical Integrity

Editors must exemplify professional conduct by adhering to:

Ethical publishing principles
Conflict of interest transparency
Maintenance of confidentiality
Commitment to unbiased editorial decisions

2.3 Editorial Competence

Members must demonstrate:

Experience in peer review
Familiarity with scientific writing and reporting guidelines (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ)
Ability to handle complex manuscripts and methodological evaluations
Strong command of academic communication

2.4 Diversity and Inclusion

IJARP is committed to building a globally representative editorial board with:

Geographic diversity (including researchers from LMICs)
Gender balance
Inclusion of various career stages (while prioritizing senior expertise)
Representation from interdisciplinary specializations

This fosters innovation, reduces bias, and strengthens cross-disciplinary collaboration.

Eligibility Criteria

A candidate for any editorial position must meet the following criteria:

3.1 Educational Qualification

Doctoral degree (PhD, DPT, MD, DDS, etc.) OR
Equivalent professional expertise with significant research contributions

3.2 Research and Publication Record

Minimum of 10 articles in indexed, peer-reviewed journals
Evidence of significant contributions to the field

3.3 Editorial and Peer-Review Experience

Documented experience as a peer reviewer
Prior editorial board involvement preferred

3.4 Ethical Compliance

No history of academic misconduct, plagiarism, or ethical violations
Full disclosure of financial, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest

Selection Process

4.1 Call for Applications or Nominations

The journal may invite:

Self-nominations
Institutional nominations
Recommendations from senior editors
Targeted recruitment for specialized fields

4.2 Submission Requirements

Applicants must submit:

Curriculum vitae
Statement of interest
Evidence of editorial and peer-review experience
Disclosure of conflicts of interest
Vision statement outlining contributions to journal development

4.3 Screening and Evaluation

Applications undergo review by the Editorial Selection Committee, which evaluates:

Academic achievements
Editorial capabilities
Ethical record
Contribution potential
Alignment with journal’s strategic goals

4.4 Interview (If Required)

Senior editorial leadership may conduct virtual interviews to assess:

Communication skills
Understanding of global publishing ethics
Commitment to editorial responsibilities

4.5 Appointment

Successful candidates receive:

Formal appointment letter
Role-specific responsibilities
Term duration (typically 3–5 years)
Editorial handbook outlining journal policies

Editorial Responsibilities

5.1 Editor-in-Chief

Defines journal’s editorial vision
Makes final decisions on accepted manuscripts
Ensures compliance with international publishing standards
Oversees ethical and misconduct investigations

5.2 Associate Editors

Manage manuscripts within their expertise
Identify qualified reviewers
Provide editorial recommendations
Ensure timely reviews

5.3 Section Editors

Oversee specialty sections
Develop thematic issues and special collections
Promote emerging research trends

5.4 Editorial Board Members

Contribute expert reviews
Provide strategic guidance
Promote journal visibility within academic communities

Performance Evaluation and Continuity

Editors are assessed annually based on:

Review turnaround times
Quality of editorial feedback
Contribution to journal development
Ethical conduct
Responsiveness and reliability

Renewal of editorial positions is contingent on satisfactory performance.

Removal or Resignation

An editor may be removed for:

Academic misconduct
Failure to perform duties
Repeated conflict of interest violations
Breach of confidentiality
Unprofessional behavior

All removals follow COPE guidance and internal review.

DATA SHARING POLICY

Purpose and Philosophy

IJARP supports Open Science and the global movement towards transparency in research. The journal's Data Sharing Policy aligns with:

FAIR Principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable)
ICMJE Data Sharing Statement Requirements
NIH and WHO Data Access Guidelines
COPE Best Practices

The purpose of data sharing is to:

Enhance reproducibility
Encourage secondary analysis
Support meta-research
Improve research integrity
Empower global collaboration

Data Availability Statement

All submitted manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement, specifying:

Where data is stored
Access conditions
Persistent identifiers (DOI, repository link)
Licenses or usage permissions
Restrictions and ethical limitations

Example statements:

“Data are available in XYZ repository, DOI:XXXX.”
“Data available upon reasonable request due to confidentiality restrictions.”

Recommended Repositories

Authors should deposit data in reputable repositories such as:

Zenodo
Dryad
Figshare
OSF
Clinical trial registries
Institutional repositories

Data must be linked to the published article through a DOI.

Types of Data to Be Shared

Raw and processed datasets
Statistical code (R, SPSS, STATA, Python)
Study protocols and data dictionaries
Supplementary analysis files
Interview schedules (qualitative research)
Laboratory instruments and calibration logs

Ethical Considerations

Authors must ensure:

Removal of identifiable personal information
Compliance with privacy legislation
Informed consent allows data sharing
Sensitive or clinical datasets follow institutional anonymization policies

Exceptions

Data sharing may be restricted if:

It compromises participant privacy
It violates legal restrictions
It involves national security concerns
It contains proprietary or commercial information

Authors must justify any restrictions.

Enforcement

Manuscripts may be rejected if:

Data sharing statements are misleading
Authors refuse reasonable requests without ethical justification
Anonymization protocols are inadequate

IJARP may request raw data for verification prior to publication.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

Introduction

Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly integrated into scholarly research and publishing. IJARP recognizes their potential while acknowledging associated ethical, methodological, and integrity challenges. This AI Policy ensures transparent, responsible, and accountable use of AI at all stages of manuscript production, peer review, and editorial decision-making.

This policy aligns with:

ICMJE Guidance on AI tools
COPE Position Statement on AI in Peer Review
UNESCO Recommendations on AI Ethics
European Commission AI Guidelines

Responsible Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI technologies (ChatGPT, GPT-based models, machine learning tools, automated image processing software, statistical AI platforms) only as assistive tools, not as creators of original scientific content.

2.1 Prohibited Uses

AI cannot be used to:

Generate entire manuscripts
Fabricate data
Create fake citations
Manipulate images
Perform peer review
Replace author expertise

2.2 Permissible Uses

AI may be used for:

Grammar improvement
Language editing
Coding assistance
Draft refinement
Data pattern recognition
Literature retrieval support (not citation generation)

2.3 Disclosure Requirement

Authors must clearly disclose AI use under:

“AI Usage Disclosure”

For example:

"AI-assisted tools were used for grammatical refinement of the manuscript. No AI was involved in data analysis, interpretation, or author decision-making."

Authorship Responsibility

AI tools cannot be listed as authors
Human authors must verify and take accountability for all AI-assisted content
AI cannot interpret findings, draw conclusions, or perform intellectual contributions

AI in Peer Review

IJARP strictly prohibits reviewers from:

Submitting AI-generated reviews
Uploading manuscripts into external AI tools (violates confidentiality)
Using AI to paraphrase confidential content

Reviewers must provide human-generated, expert evaluations.

AI in Editorial Processes

Editors may use AI tools for:

Initial screening
Checking readability
Identifying potential plagiarism
Detecting image manipulation

However:

All editorial decisions must be made by humans
AI recommendations cannot replace expert judgment

Ethical Considerations

AI tools often contain biases. Authors and editors must:

Avoid discriminatory outputs
Ensure fairness and reproducibility
Validate AI-assisted analyses
Ensure transparency in algorithm selection

Research Using AI

For manuscripts reporting on AI methodologies:

Algorithms must be fully described
Datasets must be disclosed
Limitations and ethical concerns must be discussed
Bias mitigation strategies must be detailed

Policy Violations

Violations include:

Undisclosed AI-generated content
Fabricated data
Peer-review misuse
Image manipulation

Consequences:

Rejection
Retraction
Banning future submissions
Institutional notification

GRANT SUPPORT POLICY

Introduction

Funding is an essential component of contemporary research, enabling investigators to pursue innovative questions that advance science and improve health outcomes. The Insights – Journal of Advanced Research and Practice (IJARP) is committed to ensuring complete transparency regarding the financial and non-financial support that enables scholarly work. Our Grant Support Policy ensures that all research published in the journal is accompanied by clear, accurate, and comprehensive disclosures about funding sources, financial relationships, and the role of sponsors in study design, execution, interpretation, and reporting.

This policy follows internationally accepted guidelines including:

ICMJE Funding Disclosure Standards
COPE Best Practices for Transparency
WAME Editorial Policy Recommendations
OASPA Open Access Research Funding Principles
UNESCO Standards for Research Integrity

By adhering to these standards, IJARP promotes ethical accountability, minimizes bias, strengthens research reliability, and enhances reader trust.

Importance of Funding Transparency

Transparency in grant support is essential for:

Preventing hidden biases
Enhancing credibility of results
Identifying potential conflicts of interest
Ensuring readers understand the role of sponsors
Supporting reproducibility and independent verification
Promoting ethical research practices

IJARP recognizes that funding does not inherently compromise research integrity; however, undisclosed funding has the potential to undermine trust in published work.

Mandatory Funding Disclosure

All authors must provide a Funding Statement during submission. This statement must:

Identify all funding bodies, grants, and sponsorships
Include grant numbers and institutional support (if applicable)
Specify whether the funding is full, partial, or in-kind
Describe the role of the funder in the research

Example format:

“This study was supported by the [Granting Agency] under Grant No. [XXXXX]. The funder had no role in study design, data analysis, manuscript preparation, or publication decision.”

If no funding was received:

“The authors received no financial support for this research.”

Types of Funding That Must Be Disclosed

4.1 Direct Financial Support

Government or public funding
University or institutional grants
Private foundations
Industry-sponsored research
International agencies (WHO, NIH, EU Horizon, etc.)

4.2 In-Kind Support

Free equipment, software, test kits, or laboratory access
Free participant recruitment services
Volunteer statistical or writing assistance

4.3 Personal or Internal Funding

Self-funded research
Departmental discretionary funds
Student thesis support grants

4.4 Commercial or Industry Funding

Pharmaceutical companies
Medical device manufacturers
Biotechnology firms
Technology and digital health companies

Role of Funders in Research

Authors must clearly describe funders’ involvement in:

Study conception and design
Data collection and analysis
Manuscript writing
Publication decisions
Access to raw data

If the funder did not participate in any phase of the study:

“The funding agency played no role in the research or publication process.”

Restrictions, Influence, or Bias

IJARP requires disclosure of:

Restrictions placed by funders
Conditions for publication
Intellectual property or patent-related constraints
Requirements for commercial confidentiality

If a funding agreement restricted researcher autonomy, authors must provide details.

Independent Statistical or Analytical Review

For industry-funded studies, IJARP may require:

Independent statistical validation
Independent ethics verification
Additional peer review focusing on potential bias

This ensures neutrality and scientific integrity.

Verification and Auditing

IJARP reserves the right to request:

Copies of funding agreements
Ethics approvals linked to funding
Evidence of grant acceptance

Failure to provide documentation may result in:

Manuscript rejection
Publication delay
Retraction (for post-publication discoveries)

Misrepresentation of Funding

Misrepresentation includes:

Stating “no funding” when funding existed
Incorrect grant numbers
False attribution
Concealing commercial or institutional support

Consequences include:

Correction
Retraction
Notice to sponsoring institutions
Temporary or permanent submission bans

Open Access and Funding

IJARP promotes open access research and encourages authors to:

Use institutional OA funds
Apply for research dissemination grants
Seek national or international open science funding

Compliance with International Mandates

Certain global funding agencies require:

Data sharing (NIH, UKRI, European Commission)
Open access publication (Plan S, cOAlition S)
Repository deposition (PubMed Central for NIH)

IJARP helps authors comply by:

Providing repository-friendly versions
Offering guidance on funder-mandated statements