Journal Language

The journal contains articles written in English and Hindi.

Target Audience

Researchers, educators, psychologists, psychiatrists, counsellors, social workers, policy-makers, institutional leaders, students, and all stakeholders are committed to evidence-based mental health promotion in educational settings.

Publication Frequency

Two issues per year ( June & December), with continuous online-first publication for timeliness and rapid dissemination.

Indexing and Visibility

Aiming for inclusion in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Scopus, Google Scholar, and other reputable indexing services. English titles, abstracts, and keywords ensure international reach and discoverability.

Open Access Policy

IJSUMHW is a fully open-access journal. All content is immediately and permanently free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of articles, without embargo periods, registration barriers, or paywalls.

Article Processing Charges (APC)

The journal does not charge authors, their institutions, or funding agencies for publication. This includes:

• Article Processing Charges (APCs)
• Submission fees
• Page charges
• Colour charges
• Any other publication-related fees

The journal is fully funded by Expressions India. If print copies are offered in the future, they will be available only at cost-recovery prices, without affecting online open access.

Copyright and Licensing

Authors retain copyright to their work
All articles are licenced under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Reuse Permissions

Readers and users may reuse content for any lawful purpose with proper attribution to the original author(s) and source. No additional permissions are required from the journal or the authors.

Archiving and Preservation

The journal ensures long-term digital preservation. All articles are assigned Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) for permanent citability.

Peer Review Process
IJSUMHW employs double-blind peer review to ensure rigorous, unbiased, and fair evaluation of all submissions.

Review Workflow

1. Initial Editorial Screening (5-7 days): The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor assesses the manuscript for scope fit, quality, originality, adherence to author guidelines, ethical compliance, and plagiarism check.
2. Masked Assignment: Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to at least two independent, qualified reviewers with relevant expertise and no conflicts of interest. Author and reviewer identities are masked
3. Peer Review Criteria: Reviewers evaluate originality, significance, methodological rigour, clarity of presentation, relevance to scope, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field
4. Review Timeline: Reviewers are requested to complete reviews within 3-4 weeks. Initial editorial decision will be communicated within 6-8 weeks of submission
5. Revision Process: Authors are given clear guidelines and timelines for revisions. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers
6. Final Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewer recommendations and editorial assessment

Possible Outcomes

• Accepted: Manuscript accepted with minor editorial changes
• Minor Revision: Manuscript accepted pending minor revisions (e.g., clarifications, formatting)
• Major Revision: Manuscript has potential but requires substantial revisions (e.g., methodology, analysis, restructuring)
• Reject: Manuscript does not meet quality or scope criteria, or has fundamental flaws

Appeals
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned, point-by-point response to the Editor-in-Chief within two weeks of receiving the decision. Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial board member or external expert. The decision on appeals is final.

Reviewer Recognition
The journal values the critical contributions of peer reviewers and publicly acknowledges them annually (with their consent). Outstanding reviewers may be recognised with certificates or invited to join the editorial board.
 
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
IJSUMHW adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (DOAJ, OASPA, WAME, COPE).
Duties of Editors

• Ensure fair, unbiased, merit-based, and timely evaluation of all submissions
• Decisions on acceptance or rejection are based exclusively on scholarly quality, originality, relevance, and ethical compliance
• Maintain confidentiality of submissions and do not use unpublished material for personal research
• Avoid conflicts of interest; recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts exist
• Provide clear, constructive feedback to authors
• Monitor and enforce ethical standards throughout the publication process
• Take allegations of misconduct seriously and follow COPE guidelines for investigation

Duties of Reviewers

• Provide objective, evidence-based, constructive, and timely reviews
• Decline reviews if they lack expertise, have conflicts of interest, or cannot meet deadlines
• Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscripts and do not use unpublished material for personal advantage
• Declare any conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or professional relationships with authors)
• Report suspected plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, duplicate publication, or unethical research to the editor
• Avoid personal criticism of authors; focus on scholarly merit

Duties of Authors

• Originality: Submit only original work that has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal
• Plagiarism: Avoid all forms of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism and mosaic plagiarism
• Authorship: Include only individuals who have made substantial contributions to conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation. All authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work
• Conflicts of Interest: Disclose all potential conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) that could influence research conduct or interpretation
• Funding: Acknowledge all sources of research funding and support
• Ethics Approval: Obtain appropriate ethics committee approval (Institutional Ethics Committee/Institutional Review Board) for research involving human participants. Provide approval documentation upon request
• Informed Consent: Ensure informed consent is obtained from all participants, with special safeguards for vulnerable populations (minors, individuals with mental health conditions)
• Confidentiality and Anonymisation: Protect participant confidentiality through anonymisation and de-identification, especially in case reports and qualitative research
• Data Integrity: Ensure accuracy and integrity of data; avoid fabrication, falsification, or manipulation
• Data Availability: Provide data availability statements and, where feasible and ethical, share anonymised datasets in appropriate repositories
• Citation: Acknowledge all sources appropriately; provide complete and accurate reference lists
• Reporting Standards: Follow discipline-specific reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, COREQ, CARE)
• Corrections: Notify the editor promptly of any significant errors discovered in published work.

Misconduct Handling Procedures

The journal follows COPE flowcharts for handling suspected misconduct:
Plagiarism

• All submissions are screened using Turnitin/iThenticate before peer review
• Similarity threshold: 15% or less (excluding references, quotes, and standard methods sections)
• Detected plagiarism will result in desk rejection (pre-review) or investigation (post-publication).
• Confirmed plagiarism may result in rejection, retraction, notifying the author's institution, and banning from future submissions

Data Fabrication or Falsification

• Allegations are investigated by the Editor-in-Chief with external expert consultation if needed
• Confirmed cases result in retraction, institutional notification, and possible referral to regulatory bodies

Duplicate or Redundant Publication

• Authors must declare any related publications or overlapping work at submission
• Confirmed duplicate publication results in retraction and institutional notification

Authorship Disputes

• All authors must approve the submission and any changes to authorship
• Disputes are resolved through communication with all parties and, if needed, institutional mediation
• Changes to authorship after acceptance require written consent from all authors

Ethical Violations in Research

• Research involving human participants without ethics approval or informed consent is rejected or retracted
• Violations are reported to institutional authorities and ethics committees
  Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern

Retractions

• Published articles may be retracted for serious misconduct (plagiarism, fabrication, duplication, ethical violations)
• Retraction notices are published promptly, linked to the original article, clearly labelled "Retracted," and freely accessible
• Retracted article metadata is updated in all databases (Crossref, DOAJ, indexing services)
• The retracted article remains online (not removed) to maintain the scholarly record

Corrections (Errata)

• Minor errors (typos, author name spelling, affiliation errors) are corrected via published correction notices linked to the original article.

Expressions of Concern

• Published when concerns about research integrity are raised, but an investigation is incomplete or inconclusive

AI-Generated Content Policy

• AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly, DeepL) may be used for language editing, grammar checking, translation, and literature search assistance
• AI tools must not be used to generate core content, research design, data analysis, interpretation, or conclusions
• Authors must disclose any use of AI tools in the Acknowledgements or Methods section
• Final responsibility for all content, accuracy, originality, and ethical compliance rests with the authors
• AI tools cannot be listed as authors