Editorial independence
Scientific quality, ethics, and scope determine editorial decisions. Financial considerations do not determine peer-review or acceptance outcomes.
JARH publishing standards
Editorial policies
How JARH supports independent, ethical, and transparent publishing for research on aging and healthcare.
These policies help authors, reviewers, and editors understand the responsibilities that protect the scholarly record and the people represented in research.
Single-blind (double-blind on request) · editorial decisions independent of APCs · CC BY 4.0
Policy at the point of decision
JARH policy references COPE and ICMJE guidance. The practical commitments below explain how that applies across submission, review, editorial assessment, and publication.
Respect for participants
Ethics, consent, privacy, and safeguarding are integral to research involving older adults and other participants who may need additional protections.
Transparent reporting
Clear methods, appropriate reporting guidance, declarations, and data-availability information help readers assess the evidence.
A correctable record
Concerns are considered fairly, and post-publication notices are used where needed to keep the research record accurate and transparent.
Policy map
What the policies cover
Use these concise explanations alongside the relevant author, reviewer, editor, copyright, and data guidance.
-
Review and decisionsIndependent assessment of each manuscript
JARH uses single-blind peer review, with double-blind review available on request. Editorial decisions consider scholarly merit, ethics, and fit with the journal’s scope; article processing charges and membership do not influence an editorial outcome.
-
Authorship and declarationsAccountability is shared and visible
Authors should have made a substantial contribution, participated in drafting or critical revision, approved the final version, and accepted accountability for the work. Funding, competing interests, and changes to the author list require transparent disclosure.
-
Ethics and reportingResearch involving people, animals, and communities
Human research should report ethics approval and informed-consent details, with care for privacy and vulnerable participants. Animal research should report appropriate welfare oversight. For clinical trials, prospective registration in a WHO/ICMJE-recognised registry and the registration number in the abstract and Methods support transparent reporting.
-
Integrity and the published recordFrom originality checks to post-publication action
Submissions are screened with iThenticate or equivalent tools. Concerns about plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or image and data integrity are handled under the journal’s stated procedures. Corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions may be issued when appropriate.
Responsible use
AI assistance does not transfer responsibility
AI tools may assist with language, but cannot be listed as authors. Material use should be disclosed, and authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, permissions, and integrity of the submitted work.
Confidentiality and conflicts
Editors and reviewers treat submissions as confidential. Conflicts should be disclosed and managed through recusal where appropriate; information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage.
Open scholarly record
Copyright, access, and preservation
JARH articles are published under CC BY 4.0 and authors retain copyright. This journal’s content is committed to Portico, a not-for-profit digital-preservation archive run by ITHAKA. As articles are deposited, they enter Portico’s permanent archive.
Related JARH guidance
Move between the policy, preparation, review, editorial, copyright, and data pages without losing the journal-specific context.
Preparing a manuscript?
Use the author instructions to check scope, declarations, reporting, and submission readiness before you begin the journal-specific submission workflow.
Read author instructions