Instruction for Authors

Everything you need to prepare, format and submit your manuscript to the Global Journal of Health Systems and Policy (GJHSP).

Before You Submit

Authors are invited to make a submission to GJHSP. Please review the points below before preparing your manuscript.

Editorial Assessment

All submissions are assessed by an editor to determine whether they meet the aims and scope of the journal. Those considered a good fit are sent for double-blind peer review before a decision to accept or reject is made.

Permissions & Consent

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to publish any material included with the submission, such as photos, documents and datasets. All listed authors must consent to be identified as authors, and research must be approved by an appropriate ethics committee where required.

Minimum Quality Standards

An editor may desk reject a submission that does not meet minimum standards of quality or policy relevance. Ensure that the study design and argument are clearly articulated, the title is concise, and the abstract can stand on its own.

Article Types

GJHSP publishes five types of articles. Select an article type to view its purpose, required structure, length and optional sections.

Original Research Articles

Report new empirical findings that advance knowledge in health systems, health policy, or public health governance — including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies, health policy analyses, health economic evaluations, implementation research and comparative system studies.

Length: 6,000–8,000 words

Abstract: Structured, up to 250 words

References: Up to 60

Peer review: Double-blind, ≥ 2 reviewers

  1. Title — Clear, concise and informative; reflect the health system or policy focus of the study.
  2. Structured Abstract — Up to 250 words under the headings Background, Methods, Results and Conclusions.
  3. Keywords — 4–6 keywords that accurately represent the content of the article.
  4. Introduction — State the health system or policy problem, its context and significance, and the research question and objectives.
  5. Methods — Describe the study design, setting, participants or data sources, sampling, variables, analytical approach and ethical approval. Follow the relevant reporting guideline.
  6. Results — Present findings objectively, supported by numbered tables and figures, without interpretation.
  7. Discussion — Interpret findings against existing evidence; discuss policy and practice implications, strengths and limitations.
  8. Conclusions — Summarise the key findings and their relevance for policymakers, managers and practitioners.
  9. Declarations — Author contributions, funding, conflict of interest, ethics, AI use and data availability.
  10. References — All cited sources in APA 7th edition.

Optional Sections

Acknowledgements · Funding Statement · Figures & Tables · Appendices / Supplementary Material

Health economic evaluations should report according to CHEERS 2022; observational studies according to STROBE; trials according to CONSORT; qualitative studies according to COREQ or SRQR.

Systematic & Narrative Reviews

Synthesise existing evidence to inform policy, practice and future research. Systematic reviews (including meta-analyses and scoping reviews) must follow a transparent, reproducible method; narrative reviews should offer a critical, balanced and well-structured overview of a defined topic.

Length: 5,000–7,000 (systematic) · 4,000–6,000 (narrative)

Abstract: Up to 250 words

References: Up to 100

Peer review: Double-blind, ≥ 2 reviewers

  1. Title — Identify the report as a systematic, scoping or narrative review.
  2. Abstract — Up to 250 words summarising objectives, methods, main findings and implications.
  3. Keywords — 4–6 keywords.
  4. Introduction — Rationale for the review and a clearly stated review question or objectives.
  5. Methods — Eligibility criteria, information sources, full search strategy, study selection, data extraction, quality/risk-of-bias appraisal and synthesis methods. For narrative reviews, explain how literature was identified and selected.
  6. Results / Synthesis — PRISMA flow diagram (systematic/scoping), characteristics of included studies and a structured synthesis of the evidence.
  7. Discussion — Summary of evidence, policy and practice implications, gaps and limitations.
  8. Conclusions — Key messages for policy, practice and research.
  9. Declarations — As required for all article types.
  10. References — APA 7th edition.

Optional Sections

Acknowledgements · Funding Statement · Figures & Tables · Appendices / Supplementary Material

Report systematic reviews according to PRISMA 2020 and scoping reviews according to PRISMA-ScR. Prospective registration of the protocol (e.g., PROSPERO) is encouraged.

Policy Briefs

Present concise, actionable, evidence-based recommendations for policymakers, managers and practitioners, built around a clearly defined policy problem, the supporting evidence, an assessment of options and specific recommendations.

Length: 1,500–2,500 words

Abstract: Key messages box, up to 150 words

References: Up to 30

Peer review: Double-blind (policy relevance & clarity)

  1. Key Messages — A boxed summary of up to 150 words with the main findings and recommendations.
  2. Background — The policy problem, its scale and why it matters now.
  3. Evidence Summary — A concise synthesis of the best available evidence on the problem and possible solutions.
  4. Policy Options — Two or more options assessed for effectiveness, cost, equity and feasibility.
  5. Recommendations — Specific, actionable recommendations directed to identified decision-makers.
  6. Implementation Considerations — Barriers, enablers, resources, timelines and monitoring indicators.
  7. Declarations & References — Declarations followed by up to 30 references in APA 7th edition.

Optional Sections

Acknowledgements · Funding Statement · Figures & Tables · Appendices / Supplementary Material

Write for a non-specialist policy audience: plain language, short paragraphs, and clearly labelled figures or tables that can stand alone.

Case Studies

Provide an in-depth examination of a specific health system, programme, policy, institution or response, offering lessons that may be transferable to other settings.

Length: 3,000–5,000 words

Abstract: Up to 250 words

References: Up to 50

Peer review: Double-blind, ≥ 2 reviewers

  1. Title & Abstract — Name the case and setting; abstract up to 250 words.
  2. Keywords — 4–6 keywords.
  3. Case Context — The health system, policy and socio-economic setting of the case.
  4. Methods — Data sources, data collection and analysis used to build the case.
  5. Case Description — A detailed, chronological account of the case and the actors involved.
  6. Key Findings — What worked, what did not, and why.
  7. Lessons Learned — Transferable lessons, with explicit discussion of the limits of generalisability.
  8. Declarations & References — Declarations followed by up to 50 references in APA 7th edition.

Optional Sections

Acknowledgements · Funding Statement · Figures & Tables · Appendices / Supplementary Material

Be explicit about the boundaries of the case and how far its lessons can be applied to other health systems.

Perspectives & Commentary

Offer informed opinion, critical reflection or debate on emerging issues, controversies or ideas in health systems and policy. Pieces must be clearly distinguished from research reports and should not present new empirical data.

Length: 1,500–3,000 words

Abstract: Unstructured, up to 150 words

References: Up to 40

Peer review: Double-blind or editorial (invited)

  1. Title & Abstract — An engaging title and an unstructured abstract of up to 150 words.
  2. Keywords — 4–6 keywords.
  3. Introduction — The issue and why it deserves attention now.
  4. Argument — A focused, well-argued position organised under clear subheadings.
  5. Supporting Evidence — Relevant published evidence and examples supporting the argument.
  6. Implications — What the position means for policy, practice or research.
  7. Conclusion — A concise closing statement.
  8. Declarations & References — Declarations followed by up to 40 references in APA 7th edition.

Optional Sections

Acknowledgements · Funding Statement · Figures & Tables · Appendices / Supplementary Material

Invited pieces may undergo editorial review at the Editor-in-Chief's discretion.

Submission Preparation Checklist

All submissions must meet the following requirements. Tick each item as you confirm it.

  • This submission meets the requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
  • This submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration.
  • The manuscript has been anonymised for double-blind peer review (author names and affiliations are in a separate title page).
  • All references have been checked for accuracy and completeness and follow APA 7th edition.
  • All tables and figures have been numbered and labeled.
  • Permission has been obtained to publish all photos, datasets and other material provided with this submission.
  • All mandatory declarations (contributions, funding, conflict of interest, ethics, AI use, data availability) are included.

Paper Format

These formatting instructions help authors prepare manuscripts for the Global Journal of Health Systems and Policy, published by Scholar Cave. Following them precisely ensures consistency and speeds up production.

ElementSpecification
File FormatMicrosoft Word (.docx)
Page SizeA4
Page MarginsTop 0.98″ · Bottom 0.98″ · Left 0.59″ · Right 0.59″
FontCambria
Font Size10 pt (main text), 20 pt (title), 10 pt (tables)
Line Spacing1.0 (including Abstract, References and Tables)
AlignmentJustified
Page NumberingBottom center
LanguageEnglish (UK or US spelling, used consistently)

Title & Author Information

Title: Cambria, 20 pt, Bold, Centered, Capitalized

Authors: Full name(s), Cambria, 11 pt Bold, Centered, with ORCID iDs

Affiliations: Cambria, 9 pt — department, institution, city, postal code, country

Corresponding Author: Email address, Cambria, 9 pt, Centered

Abstract & Keywords

Abstract: Up to 250 words (150 for Policy Briefs and Perspectives), Cambria 10 pt, spacing 1.0; structured for Original Research

Keywords: 4–6 keywords after the abstract, comma-separated, with a “Keywords:” label

Main Sections & Headings

Number major sections (1, 2, 3…) and subsections (1.1, 1.2…).

1. Introduction — Bold · 12 pt

1.1 Study Background — Italic · 11 pt

1.1.1 Sub-subheading — Regular · 10 pt

Citations & References

Style: APA 7th Edition

In-text: (World Health Organization [WHO], 2023) · (Rahman & Akter, 2025) · (Hasan et al., 2024)

Reference list: Alphabetical, hanging indent, 10 pt, spacing 1.0, with DOIs where available

World Health Organization. (2023). Tracking universal health coverage: 2023 global monitoring report. World Health Organization. Table 1: Example of a Table Title (Bold, 10 pt, above the table)
Health System Building BlockIndicatorData Source
Health FinancingOut-of-pocket expenditure as a share of current health expenditureNational Health Accounts
Health WorkforceDoctors, nurses and midwives per 10,000 populationNational health workforce registry
Source: Author's compilation (2026). — Tables: Cambria 10 pt, centered with grid lines, numbered consecutively; figures labelled below with a source note.

Declarations

All manuscripts submitted to GJHSP must include the following declarations at the end of the paper, after the main text and before the References section. Click each item to view the requirements and an example statement.

Author Contributions

Authors must provide a clear statement describing the specific contribution of each author. GJHSP follows the CRediT framework; describe each author's role using one or more of the following standardised roles:

Conceptualization — Ideas and formulation of research goals and aims.

Methodology — Design or development of methodology.

Formal Analysis — Statistical, economic or computational analysis.

Investigation — Conducting the research and data collection.

Data Curation — Management and organisation of research data.

Writing – Original Draft — Preparation of the initial manuscript.

Writing – Review & Editing — Critical revision and editing.

Visualization — Preparation of figures and tables.

Supervision — Oversight and leadership of the research.

Project Administration — Management and coordination of the project.

Funding Acquisition — Securing financial support for the project.

Resources — Provision of study materials, data or tools.

Example: A. Rahman: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision. S. Akter: Investigation, Data Curation, Writing – Original Draft. M. Hasan: Formal Analysis, Writing – Review & Editing.

For single-authored manuscripts: “The author confirms sole responsibility for all aspects of this work.”

Funding

List all sources of funding for the research and/or the preparation of the article, including grant numbers, and describe the role of the funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing or the decision to publish. If there was no funding, state this explicitly.

Example: This study was funded by [Funder Name] (Grant No. XXXX). The funder had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation or the decision to publish.

No funding: “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”

Acknowledgements

Acknowledge individuals, institutions, health facilities, data providers or community partners who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship. Obtain permission from everyone named.

Example: The authors thank the district health managers and community health workers who facilitated data collection.

Conflict of Interest

Declare any financial, professional, institutional or personal relationships that could be perceived to influence the work — including employment by, consultancy for, or funding from health-sector industry, governments or advocacy organisations relevant to the topic.

No conflict: “The authors declare that they have no competing interests.”

Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

If generative AI or AI-assisted tools were used in preparing the manuscript (e.g., language editing, coding, data analysis), name the tool and version and describe how it was used. AI tools cannot be listed as authors, and authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the content.

Example: During the preparation of this work the authors used [Tool, version] to improve language and readability. The authors reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for the publication.

No AI use: “No generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

Data Availability Statement

State where the data supporting the findings can be accessed (e.g., a public repository with DOI, national survey such as DHS, or available on request) and note any legal, ethical or confidentiality restrictions on sharing health data.

Example: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. / The data are openly available in [repository] at https://doi.org/xxxx.

Research Ethics & Reporting

When a manuscript involves human participants, human data or human materials, authors must adhere to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and to international standards for health research.

Mandatory Ethical Approval

Approval from an appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before the study begins and reported in the Methods, including:

  • The research reference number
  • The name of the approving committee
  • The date of approval

Informed Consent

Participants must be fully protected, including in non-interventional studies. Authors must confirm that participants were:

  • Well informed about the study
  • Assured of confidentiality
  • Aware of its purpose and rationale

Justification for Exemption

If ethical approval was not required (e.g., analysis of publicly available, anonymised secondary data), provide a clear justification in the manuscript stating the reason for the exemption and referencing the local regulation or legal clause that permits it.

Reporting Guidelines

GJHSP encourages authors to follow the relevant EQUATOR Network reporting guideline and to upload the completed checklist as a supplementary file.

CONSORT — Randomised controlled trialsSTROBE — Observational studiesPRISMA 2020 — Systematic reviews & meta-analysesPRISMA-ScR — Scoping reviewsCOREQ / SRQR — Qualitative researchCHEERS 2022 — Health economic evaluations

Privacy Statement

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.