Peer Review Process
The 10th International Conference on Hospital Administration (ICHA) is committed to maintaining the scientific quality, academic integrity, transparency, and credibility of papers submitted for publication in its conference proceedings.
The proposed peer review system is based on the principles of academic independence, objectivity, confidentiality, fairness, and constructive scholarly evaluation.
The review process aims to ensure that accepted manuscripts demonstrate scientific relevance, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and meaningful contributions to hospital administration and healthcare management.
Double-Blind Peer Review System
ICHA proposes a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the review process.
This system is intended to minimize potential bias and ensure that manuscripts are evaluated primarily on their academic merit.
Under this system:
- Reviewers do not receive identifying information about manuscript authors.
- Authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities.
- Manuscripts are evaluated objectively and independently.
- Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
- Editors are responsible for overseeing the integrity and fairness of the review process.
Authors should remove identifying information from the manuscript files provided for review and submit author details separately, where required by the submission system.
Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the editorial committee.
The screening includes evaluation of:
- Relevance to the conference's focus and scope.
- Completeness of submission requirements.
- Originality and scientific contribution.
- Compliance with manuscript formatting guidelines.
- Clarity of research objectives and methodology.
- Ethical compliance and appropriate disclosures.
- General academic quality and readability.
Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum requirements may be returned for correction or declined before external peer review.
