Publishing Policies

Public Health Weekly Report (PHWR) is an open access, peer-reviewed journal committed to adhering to the following policies to enhance and maintain its high standards.

1. Editorial policy

It is available at https://eng.phwr.org/content/contributors/for_authors.html

2. Peer review policy

Peer review process

  • 1) Manuscripts to be reviewed: all submitted or invited manuscripts are peer-reviewed.
  • 2) Who conducts peer review: Peer review is conducted by two or three external experts. A deputy editor select reviewers from the journal's reviewer pools.
  • 3) Type of peer review: PHWR adopts double-blind review, which means that the reviewers and authors cannot identify each other’s information. The authors’ names and affiliations are removed during peer review.
  • 4) Screening before peer review: If the manuscript does not align with the aims and scope of the journal or does not adhere to the “Instructions to authors”, it may be returned to the author immediately after receipt and without peer review. In the case of human population studies, the manuscript without an appropriate ethics statement is also returned to the authors without peer review.
  • 5) Plagiarism check: Before review, all submitted or invited manuscripts are screened with Similarity Check powered by iThenticate (https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/), a plagiarism screening tool. If an excessively high similarity score is found, the editorial board will perform a more in-depth content screening. The criterion for similarity rate for further screening is usually 20%; however, an excess amount of similarity in specific sentences may also be checked in every manuscript. Notably, Similarity Check excludes quotes, bibliographies, small matches of 6 words or fewer, small sources of 1% or less, and the Methods section. If a certain amount of duplicate content is detected, it is returned to the authors. Detection of the phrases generated by generative artificial intelligence platforms is also done. The detection rate may be reflected in decision making.
  • 6) Review of research data or supplementary material: Those materials are subjected to peer review.
  • 7) Duration for the first decision: The result of the first peer review is usually finished within 10 days. If there is no correspondence from the editorial office on the fate of the submitted manuscript 2 weeks after the submission, please get in touch with the editorial office at https://eng.phwr.org/content/about/contact_us.html. The editorial board’s post-review decision will be one of the followings: Accept, Minor revision, Major revision, or Rejection.
  • 8) Revision process: The editorial board may request that the authors revise the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments. If the reviewers made any requests for revision of the manuscript, the authors should do their best to revise it accordingly. If a reviewer’s opinion is not acceptable or is believed to reflect misinterpretation of the data, the authors should reasonably indicate this. After revising the manuscript, the author should upload the revised files with a reply to each item of the reviewer’s commentary. The author’s revisions should be completed within 7 days after the request. If the revisions have not been received by the due date, the editorial board will notify the author. To extend the revision period beyond 14 days, the author should negotiate with the editorial board. The manuscript review process can be provided for up to three rounds. If the authors would like further review, the editorial board may consider it. The editorial board will make a final decision on the approval of the submitted manuscript for publication and can request any further corrections, revisions, and deletions of the article text if necessary.
  • 9) Final decision maker : An editorial board finally decides the manuscript's fate, such as accept and reject after hearing from peer reviewers.
  • 10) The journal does not guarantee acceptance of initial manuscript submissions except for the commissioned ones.
  • 11) The publication date is published with all published research, including submission and acceptance dates.
  • 12) Review of in-house manuscripts: All manuscripts from editors, staff, or editorial board members are subject to the same review process as other submissions. During the review process, they will not be involved in the selection of reviewers or the decision-making process. Editors will not handle their manuscripts even if they have been commissioned.

Submission of a revised manuscript

When preparing a revised version of your manuscript, carefully follow the instructions provided in the editor's letter. Submit an annotated copy that describes the changes you have made. Failure to do so may delay the decision on your revision. If references, tables, or figures are moved, added, or deleted during the revision process, renumber them to ensure all citations remain in numeric order.

Revised manuscript submissions should include a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Authors should describe how each reviewer comment was addressed or explain why it was not addressed, and clearly indicate which paragraph in the manuscript was revised according to each comment. The response to reviewers will be shared with all reviewers. If certain data should not be included in the manuscript, authors may provide the data supporting their argument in the response to reviewers file.

The annotated copy should have changes highlighted (not by using the Track Changes function in MS Word but by marking them) with notes in the text referring to the editor or reviewer query.

Manuscript withdrawal

Corresponding authors who wish to withdraw a manuscript after submission must provide a signed letter indicating that they represent the wishes of all authors. Manuscripts will remain under consideration until the journal office receives this written request. Manuscripts cannot be withdrawn after final acceptance, except in cases of scientific error or misconduct.

Appeals of decisions

Appeals against editorial decisions must be made within 2 weeks of the decision letter. Authors should contact the editor-in-chief with detailed reasons for the appeal. Appeals are discussed with at least one associate editor and, if needed, at a full editorial meeting. The process follows COPE guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/appeals). PHWR does not consider second appeals.

Processing after acceptance

Once the manuscript is finally accepted, a proofread version will be sent to the corresponding author after professional editing. Authors should review the proof for any misspellings or errors. Delayed responses may result in the manuscript's publication being postponed to the next issue.

Galley proof

After corrections have been made, authors will receive the final version of the manuscript as a PDF file. Within 5 working days of receipt, authors must notify the editorial office (or printing office) of any errors found in the file. The proof may be revised more than once by the corresponding author, if needed. Authors should double-check the content, title, affiliations, capitalization, figure locations, and references for accuracy. Corresponding authors are responsible for any further corrections needed after printing.

Post-publication discussions

To correct errors in published articles, the corresponding author should contact the journal’s editorial office with a detailed description of the proposed correction. Errors can be corrected through an erratum (publisher's errors), corrigendum (author's errors), or retraction.

3. Copyright and Open access policy

Copyright and owner

Authors must declare that their work is original and that copyright is not breached. Copyright for all published material is owned by Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. Each author must sign the authorship responsibility and copyright transfer agreement, attesting to authorship criteria. The corresponding author submits the Copyright Transfer Form during submission. Authors must obtain and provide written permission for any previously published material. Submitted material will not be returned unless requested.

Open access license

This is an Open Access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

4. Article sharing policy (Article deposit policy)

PHWR is an Open Access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Articles can be shared only as an accepted or published version, as described below.

Accepted version

The accepted version incorporates all amendments made during peer review but precedes the final published version.

The accepted version may be placed on:

  • · The author's personal website
  • · The author's company/institutional repository or archive
  • · Non-profit repositories preprint servers or repositories
  • · Directly provided to students or research collaborators for personal use

It is recommended that the authors include a note and DOI link on the first page.

Published version

The final published version can be shared immediately upon publication under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

5. Archiving policy

In accordance with the Korean Library Act, the full text of PHWR is archived in the National Library of Korea (NLK; https://www.nl.go.kr/archive/search_eng.do?op=all&kwd=2234-2591). PHWR ensures electronic backup and preservation of journal content through archiving in the NLK. This allows for permanent preservation of PHWR papers and ensures access in the event the journal ceases publication.

6. Data sharing policy

PHWR encourages data sharing wherever possible to promote openness, transparency, and reproducibility of research. Subject to ethical and legal considerations, authors are encouraged to:

  • · Upload research data during the submission process; otherwise, share research data in a relevant public data repository with DOI for the data location.
  • · Include a data availability statement linking to the data. If it is not possible to share the data, use the statement to confirm why it cannot be shared.

PHWR accepts the ICMJE Recommendations for clinical data sharing statement policy (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/). Authors may refer to the editorial, “Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials: A Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors,” in J Korean Med Sci 2017;32:1051-3 (https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.7.1051).

7. Preprint policy

PHWR allows a paper that has not conducted peer review on a preprint server such as the MedRxiv, Research square, and bioRxiv will not be considered as a duplicate publication, provided that the following conditions are met:

  • 1) When submitting a paper, the author should clearly include a disclaimer that the paper was posted on the server before publication and provide the server’s name, registration number, and DOI of the server that was published on the title page.
    Example: Disclaimer: This manuscript is being considered for submission to Public Health Weekly Report. The manuscript published on the Research Square [DOI:00.12345./rs.3.rs.=-67890/v1] has not been peer-reviewed. Only peer-reviewed manuscripts can be used in Public Health Weekly Report.
  • 2) PHWR does not support the publication of an edited version of the manuscript modified as a result of peer review on the paper server before publication.
  • 3) Upon publication, the author is responsible for updating the DOI and the link of the final published version of the manuscript on the pre-published paper server. PHWR can accordingly be modified by providing a link with the following statements relating to the final published version of the paper, and thus the contents of the pre-published paper server.
    Example: “This paper (insert DOI) is a pre-author and pre-published version of Public Health Weekly Report paper.”

8. The process for handling cases requiring corrections, retractions, and editorial expressions of concern

PHWR follows the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf) and the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance) for this process, if not described as below:

PHWR aims to ensure the integrity of the academic record of all published or potential publications. Whenever it is recognized that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement, or distorted report has been published, it must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it should be retracted. The retraction should be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.

Correction

Errors in published papers may be identified in the form of a corrigendum or erratum when the Editor-in-Chief considers it appropriate to inform the journal readership about a previous error and makes a correction to the error in the published article. The corrigendum or erratum will appear as a new article in the journal and will cite the original published article.

Retractions

An article may be retracted when the sincerity of the published work is undermined due to the errors in the conduct, analysis and/or reporting of the study. Violation of publication or research ethics may also result in a study’s retraction. The original article is marked as retracted, but a PDF version remains available to readers, and the retraction statement is bi-directionally linked to the original published paper. Retraction statements will typically include a statement of assent or dissent from the authors.

Editorial expression of concern

Where a certain amount of doubt arises as to the honesty or integrity of a submitted or published article, journal editors may issue an expression of concern. However, it should only be issued if an investigation into the problems relating to the article has proven inconclusive, and if there are strong indicators that the concerns are valid.

9. Crossmark policy

Crossmark is an initiative to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content. By applying the Crossmark button, PHWR is committing to maintaining the content it publishes, and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur. Clicking on the Crossmark button will tell readers the current status of a document, and may also give readers additional publication record information about the document (https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/crossmark-policy-page/).

10. Advertising policy

PHWR does not accept any commercial product advertisements until policy changes otherwise.

PHWR
Feb 13, 2025 Vol.18 No.6
pp. 277~321

Most Keyword ?

What is Most Keyword?

  • It is the most frequently used keyword in articles in this journal for the past two years.

Most Read

PHWR