Author Guidelines

Manuscript preparation, submission requirements, initial editorial screening, and responsible scholarly publication at the Journal of Health and Nutrition Research (JHNR).

1. General Information and Manuscript Types

JHNR accepts scholarly manuscripts relevant to its current Focus and Scope, particularly in health sciences, medicine, public health, nutrition, food science, midwifery, nursing, pharmacy, and related fields.

The journal considers three manuscript categories:

Authors preparing review articles or case study articles should follow the corresponding current template and any specific instructions provided by the editorial office. Requirements expressly identified for original research articles must not automatically be applied to other manuscript types.

2. Manuscript Submission Requirements

All manuscripts must be submitted electronically through the official JHNR OJS platform by one of the listed authors.

Authors must prepare:

• One complete Microsoft Word manuscript (.doc or .docx) using the current JHNR template.
• A complete manuscript title, abstract, keywords, main text, references, tables, figures, and required declarations.
• Full names of all authors in the agreed authorship order.
• Complete author affiliations, including department, institution, city, and country.
• Email addresses and ORCID iDs for all authors.
• Corresponding author information, including institutional email, affiliation, academic degree, contact number, and ORCID iD.
• Accurate manuscript metadata entered into the OJS submission form.
• Relevant ethical approval, funding, conflicts of interest, AI use, and other required declarations.

All author names, affiliations, email addresses, and author order must be consistent between the submitted manuscript and OJS metadata.

3. Reviewer Suggestions

Authors are required to suggest at least two potential reviewers in the "Comments to the Editor" field during manuscript submission.

For each suggested reviewer, provide:

• Full name.
• Institutional affiliation.
• Valid professional email address.
• Relevant subject expertise, where available.

Suggested reviewers should be independent of the authors and free from relevant conflicts of interest.

Editorial Independence: Reviewer suggestions do not constitute reviewer appointments. The editorial team independently selects reviewers and is not required to use author-suggested candidates.

4. Initial Editorial Screening

A complete submission is normally screened by the Editor-in-Chief or a delegated editor within 2-3 working days after all required files and metadata have been received. This is a target, not a guaranteed deadline.

The initial screening considers:

• Relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.
• Suitability of manuscript type.
• Compliance with the current JHNR template.
• Originality and scientific contribution.
• Appropriateness of the research design and methods.
• Completeness of research ethics information.
• Accuracy of author metadata and declarations.
• Clarity of academic English.
• Quality of tables, figures, and references.
• Compliance with publication ethics requirements.

Following initial screening, the manuscript may proceed to external peer review, be returned for technical correction, or be rejected without external review.

Initial editorial screening is not equivalent to external peer review. Submission does not guarantee review or publication.

5. Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

Submitted manuscripts are screened for similarity using Turnitin before external peer review.

JHNR applies an overall similarity threshold of no more than 25%, in accordance with the journal's published plagiarism-screening policy.

The similarity percentage is interpreted together with the nature, source, and extent of textual overlap. A similarity score alone does not establish plagiarism.

Confirmed plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, duplicate publication, or serious research-integrity concerns may result in rejection, regardless of the numerical similarity score.

6. Double-Blind Peer Review

JHNR applies a double-blind peer-review system in which reviewers do not know the authors' identities, and authors do not know the reviewers' identities.

The editorial office prepares an anonymized copy of the manuscript before assigning it to external reviewers. Identifying information is removed or masked where necessary, while scientifically essential details are retained whenever possible.

Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript and provide recommendations regarding scientific quality, methodology, reporting, interpretation, and ethical compliance.

The editorial team may request additional reviews where appropriate. Reviewers' recommendations inform, but do not automatically determine, the final editorial decision.

The Editor-in-Chief retains responsibility for the final acceptance or rejection decision, in accordance with the journal's editorial procedures.

7. Editorial and Peer-Review Timeline

JHNR provides indicative editorial processing times to help authors understand the review process. Actual duration may vary.

The 24-day period refers to the usual requested reviewer report deadline, whereas 3-5 weeks represents the journal's reported average submission-to-decision period. These are different measures.

These periods are not guarantees of acceptance or publication. Additional review, reviewer availability, author revisions, or ethical assessments may extend editorial processing.

8. Original Research Article Formatting

Original research articles must follow the current JHNR 2026 manuscript template. Authors should not alter the page layout, margins, typography, column structure, or section order.

9. Structure of an Original Research Article

Original research articles should follow the organization specified in the current JHNR template.

9.1 Title

The title must accurately represent the research question and main study content. It should be clear, concise, informative, and free from unsupported promotional claims.

9.2 Abstract

Provide a standalone abstract of 200-250 words covering the study purpose, methods, principal results, conclusion, and relevant implications. Do not include citations or unexplained abbreviations.

9.3 Keywords and Key Messages

Provide 3-6 specific keywords and 2-5 concise Key Messages. Key Messages should convey the principal contribution, novelty, or practical relevance without overstating the findings.

9.4 Graphical Abstract

When required or provided, the graphical abstract must accurately communicate the study content, remain legible, and follow the current journal template and AI policy.

9.5 Introduction

Present the background, current evidence, research gap, study rationale, and objectives in a logical sequence. Avoid an unnecessarily extensive literature review.

9.6 Methods

The Methods section must provide sufficient information for scientific assessment and, where feasible, replication.

• Research design and setting.
• Study period and location.
• Population, sampling, and eligibility criteria.
• Sample-size rationale, where relevant.
• Variables, outcomes, and instruments.
• Data collection procedures and quality control.
• Interventions or exposures, where applicable.
• Statistical analysis and software.
• Ethical approval and informed consent or waiver.

Authors should follow relevant reporting guidelines, where applicable, including CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE, and ARRIVE.

9.7 Results

Report findings accurately and in a logical order. Include relevant numerical results and uncertainty measures, where appropriate. All tables and figures must be numbered consecutively, cited in the text, and free from unnecessary duplication.

9.8 Discussion

Explain the principal findings, compare them critically with relevant previous research, consider plausible interpretations, and discuss strengths, limitations, and implications. Avoid unsupported causal or generalized claims.

9.9 Conclusion

Provide a concise narrative conclusion directly addressing the research objectives and supported by the reported data. Recommendations should be proportionate to the findings.

10. Research Ethics and Reporting Standards

All research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable research ethics requirements.

For human research, authors should report the responsible ethics committee, approval information, and informed-consent or waiver arrangements, as applicable.

For animal research, authors must report relevant institutional or competent authority approval, animal welfare considerations, and applicable protocol details.

The editorial team may request supporting ethics documentation when necessary.

11. Declarations and Additional Information

11.1 Declaration of the Use of AI

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies when required by the JHNR Gen AI Policy. The declaration should identify the tool and describe its use. Routine spelling, grammar, or punctuation checking does not require a declaration under the current policy.

AI tools must not be listed as authors. Human authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, citations, research integrity, and final manuscript content.

11.2 Funding

Identify all relevant funding sources and grant numbers. If no external funding was received, state: "This research received no external funding." Where applicable, disclose the source of APC funding separately.

11.3 Acknowledgments

Acknowledge technical, administrative, logistical, or other relevant contributions that do not meet the journal's authorship criteria. Obtain permission from named individuals where appropriate.

11.4 Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional conflicts of interest. If none exist, state: "The authors declare no conflict of interest."

11.5 Author Contributions

An Author Contributions Statement identifying the specific contribution of each author is mandatory for articles published in the December 2026 issue and all subsequent issues.

Authors are encouraged to use the CRediT taxonomy. All listed authors must satisfy the applicable authorship criteria. This new reporting requirement does not automatically require retrospective amendments to earlier published articles.

11.6 Data Availability Statement

A Data Availability Statement is mandatory for articles published in the December 2026 issue and all subsequent issues.

The statement should identify how supporting data can be accessed or explain applicable ethical, legal, privacy, contractual, or practical restrictions.

Authors preparing submissions for the December 2026 issue should include both the Author Contributions Statement and Data Availability Statement before final editorial acceptance.

12. References and Citation Style

References must follow Vancouver citation style consistently throughout the manuscript. Reference-management software such as Mendeley or Zotero is recommended.

Approximately 80% of references should be relevant literature published within the last 10 years, consistent with the journal's current guidelines.

Authors must verify all bibliographic details, including author names, article titles, journal names, publication years, volumes, issues, page ranges, DOI, and accessible URLs.

References must accurately support the statements for which they are cited. Fabricated or unverified references are unacceptable.

13. Revision and Editorial Decisions

When revision is requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a clear, point-by-point response addressing editorial and reviewer comments.

Authors should explain the changes made and identify comments with which they disagree, providing scientific justification.

Possible editorial decisions include:

• Accept.
• Minor revision.
• Major revision.
• Resubmit for further review.
• Reject.

The final acceptance or rejection decision is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief, following the journal's authorized editorial procedures. Reviewer recommendations do not guarantee acceptance.

14. Final Pre-Submission Checklist