DJPH aspires to select, through peer review, the highest quality science and public health practice–related manuscripts. To achieve this, the entire peer review and publication process of the DJPH must be thorough, objective, and fair. Every aspect of this process involves important ethical principles and decisions. The reputation of DJPH depends on the trust of readers, authors, researchers, reviewers, editors, public health practitioners, research subjects, funding agencies, and administrators of public health policy. This trust is enhanced by describing as explicitly as possible DJPH policies to ensure the ethical treatment of all participants in the publication process. To learn more please review our Editorial and Ethical Policies.
Peer review is confirms the validity of any manuscript, and allow manuscripts to become more robust, easier to read, and more useful to the field.
The peer review process at DJPH is a single blind process. Authors do not know the peer reviewers, but peer reviewers do know the authors of the papers they are reviewing.
Click here for more on the DJPH Peer Review process.
Submitted papers usually receive careful scrutiny by 2 reviewers and additional assessment by the responsible copy editor, managing editor, and editor-in-chief.
Initial screening results in rejection of the majority of manuscripts within 2 weeks of submission. For those papers that are selected for review, overall time from submission to acceptance, which includes revisions by the authors, is about 2 months.
This page has been adapted with permission from that of the American Journal of Public Health and/or the American Public Health Association. The Delaware Academy of Medicine / Delaware Public Health Association is Delaware’s affiliate to the American Public Health Association.