Nepalese Heart Journal (NHJ) is a biannual, peer-reviewed, open-access, international medical journal. NHJ publishes original research and critical reviews dealing with all disciplines of cardiovascular Medicine. It is the official journal of the Cardiac Society of Nepal and is published twice a year (May and November). Each issue of NHJ publishes Original Articles, Review Articles, Case Reports, Editorials and Letters to the Editor. From time to time invited articles, editorials and review of selected topics will be published. Authors do not have to pay for the submission, processing or publication of articles in NHJ.
The Nepalese Heart Journal aims to facilitate a common portal for publication of wide ranging topics in cardiovascular research and clinical works. It aims to provide easy dissemination of research works to a variety of health workers and researchers.
NHJ follows the principles of COPE, WAME, ICJME, DOAJ, OASPA guidelines. Submitted manuscripts are duly acknowledged and initially reviewed for originality, significance, adequacy of documentation, reader interest and composition. Submitted manuscripts should not be published, simultaneously submitted or accepted for publication elsewhere.
Rejection: The preliminary rejection of the manuscript is related to; manuscript being out of scope, manuscript not formatted correctly, not following checklist and guidelines accurately, submission below publishable standards, incomplete submission (e.g. lack of ethical approval letter for research article). We request the author to go through the author guidelines in detail to avoid rejection. We hope that the rejection of current submission will not deter the author to continue submitting manuscripts to the NHJ.
If, for any reason, the corresponding author does not receive any information or update about submission within 2-4 weeks, please contact NHJ as soon as possible through email. We will make sure that your voice is heard and addressed appropriately.
The Chief Editor, together with the editorial board will ensure the double-blind peer review policy. The manuscript will be blinded when sending out for review. The author is anonymous to the reviewer and the reviewer is anonymous to the author as well. The editors will be responsible for directing the manuscripts to the appropriate reviewers who have the knowledge and/or expertise in the requisite fields. Peer Reviewers will be provided with Review Guidelines, once they accept to review the submission. In rare, controversial and special circumstances, papers that require revision as suggested by the reviewer will be sent back to that same reviewer for him/her to evaluate the manuscript once again after revised re-submission from the author. In the case of a controversial groundbreaking article that could have a far-reaching impact on the field, further reviews may be sought.
The typical review will take minimum 6-8 weeks which includes 4 weeks for peer review and remaining weeks for peer review handling process. However, this may take a little longer depending upon reviewer’s response. The final decision on whether to accept or reject the article is taken by the Editor-in-Chief based on editorial board and peer reviewers. The rejection could also be due to peer reviewers' comment not adequately answered or unanswered, plagiarism, publication misconduct and more.
The contributors are informed about the rejection/acceptance of the manuscript with the peer reviewer’s comments. Accepted articles have to be resubmitted after making the necessary changes or clarifying questions made during the peer review process. All comments received from the reviewers will be passed on to the authors within 1-2 weeks after getting back from the reviewers. NHJ respect the views, opinion, comments and decision of the reviewer. However, the right for acceptance and rejection of the manuscript is reserved with the Chief Editor, on the basis of maintaining the integrity of the science, following the guideline of ICJME, WAME and COPE. The accepted articles are edited for grammatical, punctuation, print style and format errors and page proofs and are sent to the corresponding author who should return them within three days. Non-response to galley proof may result in the delay of publication or even rejection of the article.
The article may be retracted because of scientific misconduct in cases such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism or fraudulent use of data. A signed statement from the concerned authors will be required to be submitted before an article can be retracted. Agreement of all authors of a paper is required before a retraction can be published. A notice of retraction will be published and linked to the original article clearly marked as a retracted. The original article will not be removed from online or print versions of the journal, but will be identified as a retracted article. Retractions will also be listed on the contents page.
The Nepalese Heart Journal is published twice a year in May and November.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
NHJ is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. We closely follow the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet these requirements. Below is a summary of our key expectations of editors, peer-reviewers and authors.
Editors’ responsibilities
Reviewers’ responsibilities
Authors’ responsibilities
Society responsibilities
Cardiac Society of Nepal shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above. Cardiac Society of Nepal will provide assurance that they subscribe to the principles outlined in ethical standard guideline, or to substantially similar principles, either adopting these formally or producing their own for the attention of their editors and editorial boards.
Identification of unethical behavior
Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.
Investigation
An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate. Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.
Minor breaches
Minor misconduct might addressed without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.
Serious breaches
Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.
Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)
Publication and authorship
Authors should submit an Authorship form, which should carry in sequence information on primary author, corresponding author, and other authors, with authors’ full names, affiliations, departments, email and addresses of institute affiliated (street, city, country).
NHJ will follow the ICJME recommendation with the following criteria for authorship;
Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.
Authorship of multicenter trials is attributed to a group. All members of the group who are named as authors should fully meet the above criteria for authorship. The group should jointly make decisions about contributors/ authors before submitting the manuscript for publication. The corresponding author/guarantor should be prepared to explain the presence and order of these individuals. It is not the role of editors to make authorship decisions or to arbitrate conflicts related to authorship.
Order of Authorship
The authors themselves should decide the order in which authors are listed in an article. No one else knows as well as they do their respective contributions and the agreements they have made among themselves. Many different criteria are used to decide order of authorship. Among these are relative contributions to the work and, in situations where all authors have contributed equally, alphabetical or random order. Readers cannot know, and should not assume, the meaning of order of authorship unless the approach to assigning order has been described by the authors. Authors may want to include with their manuscript a description of how order was decided. If so, editors should welcome this information and publish it with the manuscript.
Authorship criteria
To qualify for authorship, the author must have contributed substantially to the intellectual content of the manuscript.
A
B
C
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chairperson who provided only general support. Editors should ask corresponding authors to declare whether they had assistance with study design, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. If such assistance was available, the authors should disclose the identity of the individuals who provided this assistance and the entity that supported it in the published article. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged.
Groups of persons who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under such headings as “clinical investigators” or “participating investigators,” and their function or contribution should be described—for example, “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” or “provided and cared for study patients.” Because readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions, these persons must give written permission to be acknowledged.
Authorship Disputes
Disputes about authorship are best settled at the local level, before journals review the manuscript. However, at their discretion editors may become involved in resolving authorship disputes. Changes in authorship at any stage of manuscript review, revision, or acceptance should be accompanied by a written request and explanation from all of the original authors.
Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism, if detected and proved, would be considered a punishable offence.
Immediate and unbiased action will be taken by the Plagiarism Committee.
There are no publication fees for authors.
Established by INASP in 2007. Managed by Tribhuvan University Central Library.
Nepal Journals Online (NepJOL) is a service to provide online publication of Nepalese journals. For more information about NepJOL and how to join the service, see the About page.
