Instructions for authors


1.     General

JIEPH is an online open access peer-reviewed scientific public health journal. Authors are encouraged to submit original research, systematic review and short reports on interventional epidemiology and public health.

Prior to submitting your first article, you should apply for a user name and password.

JIEPH offers a user friendly two-step process for online submission. Simply register at the JIEPH website ( and then follow the prompts.

Manuscripts will be initially screened by an editor for adherence to the journal's instructions or identification of gross deficiencies. At this stage, the corresponding author can be contacted by the editorial office for clarification or the manuscript can be rejected. Once this initial screening is completed, manuscripts are sent to two-three referees; if appropriate, a statistical reviewer is involved. On average, we will report back to authors within 6 weeks with a first decision. We encourage authors not to contact the editorial office less than 6 weeks after the initial submission. We discourage and will ignore requests by authors to speed up the publication process for a particular manuscript.

Manuscripts must be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript, and should not be submitted by anyone on their behalf. The submitting author takes responsibility for the article during submission and peer review.

The language of publication is English.  All accepted manuscripts are copy-edited.

To facilitate an efficient publication process, only submissions through the JIEPH manuscript management system are accepted.

Files can only be submitted one file at a time. The submission process allows the authors to interrupt it at any time, and continue where they left off at their return on the site.

During submission you will be asked to provide a cover letter. Use this to explain why your manuscript should be published in the journal and to elaborate on any issues relating to our editorial policies detailed in the instructions for authors.

Assistance with the process of manuscript preparation and submission is available at our website [INSERT LINK HERE].We provide a collection of links to useful tools and resources for scientific authors, on our author resources page.

JIEPH content licensing: Articles published in JIEPH are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons By Attribution 4.0 International License ( ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

2.     Submission of a paper

Style and Format

File format

Submit the manuscript file in DOC or DOCX format. Your file should not be locked or protected.


We encourage you to present and discuss your findings concisely.


Use a standard font size and any standard font, except for the font named “Symbol”. To add symbols to the manuscript, use the Insert → Symbol function in your word processor or paste in the appropriate Unicode character.


Limit manuscript sections and sub-sections to 3 heading levels. Make sure heading levels are clearly indicated in the manuscript text.

Layout and spacing

Manuscript text should be double-spaced.

Do not format text in multiple columns.

Page and line numbers

Include page numbers and line numbers in the manuscript file. Use continuous line numbers (do not restart the numbering on each page).


Footnotes are not permitted. If your manuscript contains footnotes, move the information into the main text or the reference list, depending on the content.


Manuscripts must be submitted in English.


Define abbreviations upon first appearance in the text.

Do not use non-standard abbreviations unless they appear at least three times in the text. List all non-standard abbreviations (with definitions) in alphabetical order in a separate section at the beginning of the manuscript.

Keep abbreviations to a minimum.

Reference style

JIEPH uses the National Library of Medicine style as outlined in Citing Medicine 2nd Edition.


We recommend using MathType for display and inline equations, as it will provide the most reliable outcome. If this is not possible, Equation Editor or Microsoft's Insert→Equation function is acceptable. Please do not embed equations as images.

Avoid using MathType, Equation Editor, or the Insert→Equation function to insert single variables (e.g., “a² + b² = c²”), Greek or other symbols (e.g., β, Δ, or ′ [prime]), or mathematical operators (e.g., x, ≥, or  ±) in running text. Wherever possible, insert single symbols as normal text with the correct Unicode (hex) values.

Do not use MathType, Equation Editor, or the Insert→Equation function for only a portion of an equation. Rather, ensure that the entire equation is included. Equations should not contain a mix of different equation tools. Avoid “hybrid” inline or display equations, in which part is text and part is MathType, or part is MathType and part is Equation Editor.


 Use correct and established nomenclature wherever possible.

Units of measurement: Use SI units. If you do not use these exclusively, provide the SI value in parentheses after each value. Read more about SI units.

Drugs: Provide the Recommended International Non-Proprietary Name (rINN).

Species names: Write in italics (e.g., Homo sapiens). Write out in full the genus and species, both in the title of the manuscript and at the first mention of an organism in a paper. After first mention, the first letter of the genus name followed by the full species name may be used (e.g., H. sapiens).

Genes, mutations, genotypes, and alleles: Write in italics. Use the recommended name by consulting the appropriate genetic nomenclature database (e.g., HUGO for human genes). It is sometimes advisable to indicate the synonyms for the gene the first time it appears in the text. Gene prefixes such as those used for oncogenes or cellular localization should be shown in roman typeface (e.g., v-fes, c-MYC).

Allergens: The systematic allergen nomenclature of the World Health Organization/International Union of Immunological Societies (WHO/IUIS) Allergen Nomenclature Sub-committee should be used for manuscripts that include the description or use of allergenic proteins. For manuscripts describing new allergens, the systematic name of the allergen should be approved by the WHO/IUIS Allergen Nomenclature Sub-committee prior to manuscript publication. Examples of the systematic allergen nomenclature can be found at the WHO/IUIS Allergen Nomenclature site.

Conflicts of interest

JIEPH requires authors to declare all competing interests in relation to their work. All submitted manuscripts must include a ‘competing interests’ section listing all competing interests (financial and non-financial). Where authors have no competing interests, the statement should read “The author(s) declare(s) that they have no competing interests”. The Editor may ask for further information relating to competing interests.

At the time of submission, authors must list all competing interests relevant to the submitted research. Examples may include but are not limited to:

  • Names of all funding sources
  • Description of funder’s role in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the paper; and/or decision to submit for publication
  • Whether they have served or currently serve on the editorial board of the journal to which they are submitting
  • Whether they have acted as an expert witness in relevant legal proceedings
  • Whether they have sat or currently sit on a committee for an organization that may benefit from publication of the paper

Organization of a full-length research paper.

Maximum length: 3500 words in main text (i.e., excluding abstract, references, legends, tables and figures), 4 tables/figures maximum, and a structured abstract of 250 words plus up to 50 references.

Title page: This page should have: a) The title of the paper (include the study design if appropriate; for example: A versus B in the treatment of C: a randomized controlled trial; X is a risk factor for Y: a case control study), b) Authors names (full name – no qualification. Strictly follow this order: First Name, Middle name (if ever), Last Name. E.g.: Paul Kevin Akuna), c) institution(s) of origin, d) Corresponding author plus his/her address, telephone and fax number, e-mail address, e) Word count (for both abstract and the main text)

Abstract: The abstract of the manuscript should not exceed 250 words and must be structured into separate sections: Background: the context and purpose of the study; Methods: how the study was performed and statistical tests used; Results: the main findings; Conclusion: brief summary and potential implications. Please minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references in the abstract.

Keywords: Up to ten keywords (suitable for Index Medicus listing) should be provided at the end of the Abstract.

Abbreviations:  A list of abbreviations is not accepted. Define abbreviations the first time they are used in the text and use them thereafter. No abbreviations in the abstract except for vary know ones.

Background:  The background section should be written from the standpoint of researchers without specialist knowledge in that area and must clearly state - and, if helpful, illustrate - the background to the research and its aims. Reports of clinical research should, where appropriate, include a summary of a search of the literature to indicate why this study was necessary and what it aimed to contribute to the field. The section should end with a very brief statement of what is being reported in the article.

Methods: Sufficient information should be given to permit repetition of the experimental work. This should include the design of the study, the setting, the type of participants or materials involved, a clear description of all interventions and comparisons, and the type of analysis used, including a power calculation if appropriate.

Results: The Results should be stated concisely without discussion and should not normally contain any references. The same data should not be presented in figures and tables. Do not repeat all the data that is set out in the tables or figures in the text; emphasize or summarize only important observations.

Discussion: The Discussion should deal with the interpretation of the results and not recapitulate them. We encourage authors to write their Discussion in a structured way, as follows:a) statement of principal findings; b) strengths and weaknesses of the study; c) strengths and weaknesses in relation to other studies; d) discussion of important differences in results; e) meaning of the study; f) unanswered questions and future research.

Conclusion: The conclusion should provide a brief summarize of the key findings, potential implications and the way forward.

Acknowledgements: Please acknowledge anyone who contributed towards the study by making substantial contributions to conception, design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, or who was involved in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content, but who does not meet the criteria for authorship. Please also include their source(s) of funding. Please also acknowledge anyone who contributed materials essential for the study. The role of a medical writer must be included in the acknowledgements section, including their source(s) of funding. Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements. Please list the source(s) of funding for the study, for each author, and for the manuscript preparation in the acknowledgements section. Authors must describe the role of the funding body, if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; and in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Competing interest: Authors are responsible for recognizing and disclosing conflicts of interest that might bias their work. They should acknowledge in the manuscript all financial support for the work and other personal connections. Authors are required to complete a declaration of competing interests. All competing interests that are declared will be listed at the end of published articles. Where an author gives no competing interests, the listing will read 'The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests'. When completing your declaration, please consider the following questions:

Financial competing interests

In the past five years have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future? Is such an organization financing this manuscript (including the article-processing charge)? If so, please specify.

Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future? If so, please specify

Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the manuscript? Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript? If so, please specify.

Do you have any other financial competing interests? If so, please specify.

Non-financial competing interests

Are there any non-financial competing interests (political, personal, religious, ideological, academic, intellectual, commercial or any other) to declare in relation to this manuscript? If so, please specify.

If you are unsure as to whether you, or one your co-authors, has a competing interest please discuss it with the editorial office.

Authors' contributions: In order to give appropriate credit to each author of a paper, the individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section. The Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM) of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) recommends the following criteria for authorship (Learn more about the URM on Authorship and Contributorship):

Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.

When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript (3). These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship/contributorship defined above, and editors will ask these individuals to complete journal-specific author and conflict-of-interest disclosure forms. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation and identify all individual authors as well as the group name. Journals generally list other members of the group in the Acknowledgments. The NLM indexes the group name and the names of individuals the group has identified as being directly responsible for the manuscript; it also lists the names of collaborators if they are listed in Acknowledgments.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.

All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.

References - References must be numbered consecutively, in brackets or parentheses (like this (1), or this (2,3) or even this (4-7)), in the order in which they are cited in the text, followed by any in tables or legends. Reference citations should not appear in titles or headings. Each reference must have an individual reference number. Preferably, limit the number of references to 50. If automatic numbering systems are used, the reference numbers must be finalized and the bibliography must be fully formatted before submission. We encourage authors to use a recent version of EndNote (version 5 and above) or Reference Manager when formatting their reference list, as this allows references to be automatically extracted. Please take care to follow the reference style precisely; references not in the correct style will lead the journal to immediately decline the submission.

We strongly advocate the use of Zotero, a free and open source reference management software which is a very good alternative to expensive software like Reference Manager or EndNote.

Download output style (JIEPH.os) for Reference Manager.

Download output style (JIEPH.ens) for EndNote.

Download output style (JIEPH.csl)) for Zotero.

Examples of references in NLM style

Book references
  1. Oshinsky DM. Polio: an American story. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press; 2005. 342 p.
  2. Quammen D, Quammen D. Ebola: the natural and human history of a deadly virus. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 2014. 119 p.
Web references
  1. World Health Statistics [Internet]. WHO. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from:
  2. Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever [Internet]. World Health Organization. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from:
Journal references
  1. Ijarotimi IT, Ilesanmi OS, Aderinwale A, Abiodun-Adewusi O, Okon I-M. Knowledge of Lassa fever and use of infection prevention and control facilities among health care workers during Lassa fever outbreak in Ondo State, Nigeria. Pan Afr Med J. 2018;30:56.
  2. Limaiem F, Bouraoui S. Metastasis of renal cell carcinoma to the pancreas 11 years postnephrectomy. Pan Afr Med J. 2018;30:53.

Supplementary material/Appendices (if any) - Submit any supplementary materials along with your manuscript using the fields provided. Supplementary materials will be peer reviewed. The editorial office can also decide which material will be published as supplemental material.


General instructions for tables.

Append tables at the end of your manuscript, after the reference section

Maximum 3 tables per articles. If more tables are required, it will have to be justified

Each table should fit on one page. No table overlapping over several pages. So no matter the size of the table, make sure it can comfortably fit on a single page (portrait or landscape)

Elements inside the table should be contained within cells.

Download samples of correctly formatted tables (Microsoft Word 2002-2003, *.DOC): Table 1, Table 2.


General instructions for figures.

Include a legend for your images inside the main text, after the reference section

Should be provided as separated files during the manuscript submission. Do not embed images within the main text.

Major image formats are accepted excluding BMP. (JPEG, PNG, TIFF)

Provide high resolution images, not tiny thumbnails. Image of poor quality will be rejected.

The size of the uploaded image is limited to 4 MB.

Files must be named with the three letter file extension appropriate to the file type (eg: .jpeg, .png). You will be asked to provide figure labels during the submission process. (The label is the small comment that usually goes with the figure. Example: Figure 1: Prevalence of diabetes in the study population aged 18 years and above. Findings of the TRICARE Diabetes Study, Uganda, 2006.)

If you use excel to generate your graph, avoid 3D, crowded axes, colored background, strong grid etc.. Use Tahoma font (size 10 maximum) for all items in your graphs (Title, legend, axes etc..). Expand your Excel graph to obtain a large image, copy and paste it in Paint (Microsoft Paint), crop any white border and save the image as PNG or JPEG. Submit this image for your manuscript (don't forget to include the legends for each figure inside the main manuscript)

Examples of properly formatted Excel graphs are available here.

Photographs of patients

If a patient is identifiable in the photo, the patient will have to provide is written consent to have his photograph published by signing the JIEPH Release For Photograph of Identifiable Patients.

Any information that can be used to uniquely identify, contact, or locate a single person or can be used with other sources to uniquely identify a single individual should be remove from the photograph. Such information include: such as patient full names, address (block, neighborhood, town), national identification number.

Any information that might identify the patient or hospital, including the date, should be removed from the image.

The suitability for publication of the image will be decided by the editorial team or a reviewer expert in the domain.

Outbreak Investigation Report

Guidelines for writing outbreak investigation reports

Cover page: Follow general guidelines


Word count: 300 words

- What was the problem?

- What was done to address the problem?

- What was found?

- What conclusions were drawn?

- What recommendations were made?

- What public health actions were taken?


Nature of the problem and its public health importance:

- Problem description

- Sequence of events leading to the study or investigation

- Why was an investigation undertaken?

Contacts in the field and investigation team

Pertinent background information and situation upon arrival:

- Geographic setting

- Size of community/hospital, etc

- What had been done so far?

- What was known to date?

- Brief statement of the working hypothesis

Objectives of the investigation


Case definition

Clinical, laboratory, time, place, person

Case finding methods

Source and mode of data gathering (telephone, interviews, record review, etc)

Analytical study-design and rationale

Case-control study

- Control definition

- Control selection

- Definition of exposure(s)

- How was exposure measured and categorised?

- What measure(s) of association were chosen?

- What statistical test(s) were chosen?

- Rationale for stratified and multivariate analysis, if any

Cohort study

- Definition of exposure

- How was exposure measured and categorised?

- What measure(s) of association were chosen?

- What statistical test(s) were chosen?

- Rationale for stratified and multivariate analysis, if any

Cross-sectional, etc

- Idem

Laboratory methods

- Type of samples

- Laboratory examination and methods

- Further typing

Environmental studies

- Type of inspection

- Method for sample collection

Other studies


Descriptive findings

- Response rates

- Number of persons meeting case definition

- Overall attack rate (AR)

- Description by

  • time (epidemic curve)
  • place (AR by place)
  • person (clinical features, AR by demographic characteristics)
  • Laboratory findings

- Number of samples tested and found positive

- Typing results

Environmental study findings

- Number of samples tested and found positive

- Comparison with human samples


- What do the descriptive results suggest in terms of risk groups, source, mode of transmission, exposure?

- Hypotheses generated that will be subsequently tested in analytic studies.

Analytical study results

- Proceed from general to particular

- From univariate to bivariable to multivariable (stratification and then regression) analysis.

Further studies performed, if any

Pending results, including lab


Main results

Our investigation suggests that ……

Refutation of findings (Validity)

- Limitations of study design

- Possible biases (information, selection, confounding) that may have lead to the observed results.

Inferences from analytic study results

- Whether the findings fit with what is known about the disease

- Which criteria of causality have been met.


- Present a logical, clear interpretation of the results; explain how the working hypothesis is confirmed or disproved by the results.

Recommendations, actions

- Feasible recommendations for prevention/control measures based on public health implications of the findings.

- Rationale for recommendations and actions

- Further or future studies needed

Signatures of investigators and supervisors


- With a complete legend including time, place, person.


- With a complete legend including time, place, person.


NLM style

Short communication.

A maximum of 2000 words in the main text (i.e. excluding abstract, references and legends) plus up to ten references and normally no more than two illustrations (tables or figures or one of each). Otherwise in the same format as full-length original papers (see above).


A maximum of 5000 words in the main text (i.e. excluding abstract, references and legends) plus up to 100 references. Reviews are usually solicited, although unsolicited Reviews may be considered for publication. Prospective writers of Reviews should first consult the Editors

Letters to the Editors.

Comment briefly on findings of Journal articles or other noteworthy public health advances (up to 800 words in main text, no abstract, limited to 10 references). Please note that word counts refer exclusively to the main text and do not include abstract, references, or acknowledgments.


Up to 2500 words in main text, 2 tables/figures, and an unstructured abstract of 120 words.


Report Preliminary or novel findings may be reported as (up to 800 words in main text, 2 tables/figures, and an abstract of up to 80 words). The following structure applies to a brief: Abstract, Brief, Competing interests, Authors’ contributions, Acknowledgments (if any), Tables and figures (if any, maximum 1 table and 1 figure), References (not more than 15 references).


An editorial is an article written by or on behalf of the editors that gives an opinion on a topical issue. Editorials are usually solicited. Contact the editorial office if you wish to submit an editorial to the journal.

The structure of an editorial typically includes:


Competing interests



An opinion piece is a short article providing the personal opinion of the author on a subject of interest. Opinion article may be solicited or not.            The following structure applies to an opinion piece: Abstract, Opinion, Competing interests, References (not more than 5   references). Contact the editorial office if you            wish to         submit an opinion        piece.


A perspective essay is an essay where the author is asked to voice their opinion on a given topic. The topic chosen to provide a personal perspective about should be of clinical or public health interest to JIEPH readership. A perspective should not be based on the opinions of others, but should explicitly      express the author's perspective or views.           In the process of writing a perspective, the author should help readers understand how they form their opinion. A perspective is typically a non-technical document, easily understandable to a wide non-technical audience, so avoid using jargon. Use        the first person (I, or we if more than one author). Use details and examples    to illustrate your point.

Supplements and workshop reports

We welcome conferences sponsored supplements and proceedings.

Supplements are special collections of content with a common theme or origin. Supplements can contain meeting abstracts or articles, and can feature article types not normally considered for publication in the main journal.


  1. Supplements may or may not be sponsored.
  2. Special conditions apply for projects which are sponsored by for-profit organizations.
  3. All sponsorship arrangements must be declared (see sections 5c and 5d below).

Supplements can originate from a variety of sources, and may be commissioned by the journal or by another organization or group. Typically, organizing groups will be conferences, societies, research groups, charities, government or non-government organizations, communications agencies, etc.

Acceptance criteria

  1. Articles and abstracts submitted for publication must be original and should not have been previously published in a citeable format.
  2. The work must contain reliable data, add to the published literature, and be of educational value or represent a professional service to the scientific community.
  3. The work must be balanced, objective, of good quality, and independent. The integrity, independence and reputation of the journal are of prime importance.
  4. All submissions must comply with JIEPH’s editorial policies.
  5. Supplements solely for promotional purposes will not be considered.
  6. Acceptance or rejection by the Editor of the journal is solely based on scientific merit. Profitability does not influence editorial decisions.


  1. A declaration of sponsorship is included on contents pages online and in the case of supplements sponsored by for-profit organizations, in the individual articles.
  2. Where the publication fee is shared between authors, a statement about the author’s source funding for publication is to be included in the article.
  3. Financial relationships between any of the Editors, authors and sponsors must be disclosed along with any other competing interests.
  4. In supplements sponsored by for-profit organizations, where any product of the sponsor is mentioned in an article, a statement to clarify for this for readers must also be included in the Declarations section of the article.
  5. Any payments (honoraria, expenses, etc) made to Supplement Editors, authors or other parties with respect to generation of articles or the supplement must be declared.

The Editor maintains editorial responsibility for the content of all supplements in their journal, including adherence to JIEPH’s editorial policies. They retain the authority to reject or request amendments to any article or abstract submitted to a supplement.

Peer review

  1. Articles submitted to supplements are subject to peer review using the same criteria applied to other journal content.
  2. The journal’s Editor will decide whether the peer-review process is to be administered by the journal or the supplement organizers. Where supplement organizers are responsible for administering peer review, all referee reports and correspondence relating to the process are submitted with the articles for assessment to ensure that the process meets journal requirements.
  3. All supplements funded by for-profit organizations undergo the standard peer-review process administered by the journal and overseen by the Editor.
  4. All final decisions regarding acceptance are the responsibility of the Editor of the journal.
  5. Supplement Editors are appointed following consultation with the Editor of the journal. All Supplement Editors must provide a competing interests statement. Abstract supplements do not require Supplement Editors.

Abstracts must undergo a review and acceptance process by a suitably qualified group appointed by the conference. A specialist supplement handling team at JIEPH manages the negotiation of publication terms and handles the production process.

Charges apply for all supplements. JIEPH requires that a statement is made in each supplement to state how the publication costs have been funded.

If you are unable to find the information you need on these pages, please email us.

Revised manuscripts

If you are asked to revise your manuscript you will be expected to provide a covering letter that responds in detail to each point raised by reviewers or editors, and to highlight new material in the text using a different color (do not use the 'track changes' mode of Word). If a manuscript returned to the authors for revision is not returned to the Editorial Office within the stipulated time-period (usually 4 weeks), it will be treated as a new manuscript.


An email is sent to the corresponding author. Typographical errors only should be corrected. The corrected proof should be returned within 48 h. Failure to comply with this deadline will delay publication.


Verbatim material or illustrations taken from other published sources must be accompanied by a written statement from the author, and from the publisher if holding the copyright, giving permission to JIEPH for reproduction.


The author(s) keep(s) the copyright to his/their article if and when the article is accepted for publication. The copyright covers the exclusive and unlimited rights to reproduce and distribute the article in any form of reproduction (printing, electronic media or any other form); it also covers translation rights for all languages and countries. For more information about the copyright, see our copyright agreement.

Publication and peer review processes

Key points

JIEPH uses online double blind peer review to speed up the publication process. Submitted manuscripts will be sent to peer reviewers, unless they are either out of scope, do not meet the stipulated standards for the journal.

Every effort is made to anonymize authors and reviewers. Once an article has passed an initial technical review, it is sent to at least three reviewers who send their reports to the publication committee made up of the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor and Scientific Editor which evaluates their reports

The publication committee can make one of four recommendations:

  1. Accept
  2. Revise
  3. Resubmit
  4. Decline

Each recommendation has to receive unanimous support from the publications committee. In the event the committee is split on a recommendation, the manuscript is sent to another set of three reviewers for an additional round of peer review.

Editors and reviewers are also required to declare any competing interests and may be excluded from the peer review process if a competing interest exists.

The article will be available online through JIEPH as browser able (html) and PDF format. The ultimate responsibility for any decision lies with the Editor-in-Chief, to whom any appeals against rejection should be addressed.

Each author will be asked to provide the contact details (including e-mail addresses) of at least 2 potential peer reviewers for their manuscript. These should be experts in their field of study, who will be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. However, any suggested peer reviewers should not have published with any of the authors of the manuscript within the past five years and should not be members of the same research institution. Members of the Editorial Board of the journal can be nominated. Suggested reviewers will be considered alongside potential reviewers identified by their publication record or recommended by Editorial Board members.

Reviewers are asked whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, how interesting it is and whether the quality of the writing is acceptable. Where possible, the final decision is made on the basis that the peer reviewers are in accordance with one another, or that at least there is no strong dissenting view. In cases where there is strong disagreement either among peer reviewers or between the authors and peer reviewers, advice is sought from a member of the journal's Editorial Board. The journal allows a maximum of two revisions of any manuscripts.

Reviewers are also asked to indicate which articles they consider to be especially interesting or significant. These articles may be given greater prominence and greater external publicity.

  1. Editorial policies

Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to JIEPH must not be under consideration by any other journal. The manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, with that exception that the journal is willing to consider peer-reviewing manuscripts that are translations of articles originally published in another language. In this case, the consent of the journal in which the article was originally published must be obtained and the fact that the article has already been published must be made clear on submission and stated in the abstract. Authors who publish in JIEPH retain copyright to their work. Correspondence concerning articles published in JIEPH is encouraged.

Submission of a manuscript to JIEPH implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content, and that any research that is reported in the manuscript has been performed with the approval of an appropriate ethics committee. Research carried out on humans must be in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration, and any experimental research on animals must follow internationally recognized guidelines. A statement to this effect must appear in the Methods section of the manuscript, including the name of the body which gave approval, with a reference number where appropriate. Informed consent must also be documented. Manuscripts may be rejected if the editorial office considers that the research has not been carried out within an ethical framework, e.g. if the severity of the experimental procedure is not justified by the value of the knowledge gained.

Generic drug names should generally be used. When proprietary brands are used in research, include the brand names in parentheses in the Methods section.

We ask authors of JIEPH papers to complete a declaration of competing interests, which should be provided as a separate section of the manuscript, to follow the Acknowledgements. Where an author gives no competing interests, the listing will read 'The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests'.

To learn more about competing interests the following articles provide some background:

Morin K, Rakatansky H, Riddick Jr FA, Morse LJ, O'Bannon 3rd JM, Goldrich MS, Ray P, Weiss M, Sade RM, Spillman MA.Managing conflicts of interest in the conduct of clinical trials. JAMA. 2002 Jan 2;287(1):78-84.

DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A. Reporting financial conflicts of interest and relationships between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA. 2001 Jul 4;286(1):89-91.

Smith R. Beyond conflicts of interest. BMJ. 1998; 317 :291. []

Smith R. Making progress with competing interests. BMJ. 2002; 325 :1375. []

For all articles that include information or clinical photographs relating to individual patients, written and signed consent from each patient to publish must also be mailed or faxed to the editorial staff. The manuscript should also include a statement to this effect in the Acknowledgements section, as follows: "Written consent for publication was obtained from the patient or their relative."

Online submission

1. Requirements

You will need the following to complete the submission of your manuscript:

Name and email addresses of all authors.

Correctly formatted manuscript: Microsoft Word (version 3 and above).

Correctly formatted figures in one of the acceptable formats (see Figures).

Cover letter that explains why the journal should consider your manuscript, declares any competing interests and confirms that the manuscript is not currently considered for publication in any other journals.

  1. NLM reference style

We strongly encourage authors to use a reference software to format references. Output styles for Reference Manager and EndNote are provided below. In case these software aren't available, format your references manually.

A sample of the NLM reference style below (1-7).

  1. Ijarotimi IT, Ilesanmi OS, Aderinwale A, Abiodun-Adewusi O, Okon I-M. Knowledge of Lassa fever and use of infection prevention and control facilities among health care workers during Lassa fever outbreak in Ondo State, Nigeria. Pan Afr Med J. 2018;30:56.
  2. Limaiem F, Bouraoui S. Metastasis of renal cell carcinoma to the pancreas 11 years postnephrectomy. Pan Afr Med J. 2018;30:53.
  3. Oshinsky DM. Polio: an American story. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press; 2005. 342 p.
  4. Quammen D, Quammen D. Ebola: the natural and human history of a deadly virus. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 2014. 119 p.
  5. World Health Statistics [Internet]. WHO. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from:
  6. Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever [Internet]. World Health Organization. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from:
  7. World Health Organization, editor. Research for universal health coverage. Geneva: WHO; 2013. 146 p. (The world health report).

Download journal output style for Reference Manager

Download journal output style for EndNote

Download journal output style for Zotero

Access the online Manuscript Submission System.

JIEPH record retention policy

Material and records created during the submission process will be archived. Once archived, the materials will no longer be accessible to the submitting author through the journal panel. The duration of retention of records created during the submission process is as follows:

Manuscripts already published: 2 years from the date of publication

Manuscripts rejected or withdrawn: 2 years from the date of the action

Authors willing to access these material would have to contact the editorial office of the journal.

JIEPH correction policy

We work closely with authors to make what we publish error-free.

When an article is published, the corresponding author receives an email and a correction request sheet which can be used to submit corrections to our online proof checking system if necessary. In each case, we make sure that corrections are handled as soon as possible.

All corrections are handled by the editor assigned to the article.

All other changes requested will be reviewed by the editorial team for appropriateness.

We publish corrections in Erratum and Corrigendum articles as soon as we can.

Once a manuscript is published, authors can request changes for; grammatical and orthographic errors, errors in the spelling of author names or affiliation, invalid or non-readable characters.

After a manuscript is published, JIEPH editors will not accept requests to change the order of authors, add new authors or remove authors.

Requests to make intensive and extensive changes anywhere in the text will be declined.

JIEPH retraction policy

Retractions are considered by the JIEPH editorial office after assessing evidence of unreliable data or findings, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unethical research practices.

The JIEPH editorial office may consider an expression of concern notice if an article is under investigation.

When a retraction notice is published in JIEPH, the retracted article and the PDF are watermarked with “retracted article” before the notice is submitted for indexation on PubMed and other article databases where JIEPH content is deposited

Depending on the nature of the retraction, authors may also be banned from publishing in JIEPH for up to five (5) years.

JIEPH follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) International standards for editors and authors and COPE guidelines on investigating scientific misconduct. JIEPH also follows the ICMJE recommendations

Kleinert S & Wager E (2011) Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 51 in: Mayer T &Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 317-28). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)