• JOHOE adheres to a double-blind peer-review process. Each manuscript is sent to two or more reviewers in the process of blinded peer review. Peer reviewers will be asked to determine whether a manuscript could be accepted, revised, or rejected then the decision letter shows the status of the manuscript sent to the author. The reviewing was recommended to check the novelty and originality of the manuscript, the scientific reliability, Ethical aspects, the accuracy of its technical content, and its impact on and significance to the discipline.


  • The review process will begin by an invitation email which includes the abstract of the manuscript if the reviewers accept it, he/she will be registered in the JOHE portal and a Username and Password will be sent to him/her automatically, for continuing the review processes reviewer must log in to her/his profile in reviewers part and follow the instruction. For reviewing the manuscript, click on the ID of the manuscript, fill the form, and choose one of the options (Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, and Reject), then send it to the editor.


  • The authors will receive a notifications email of the editorial decisions also they could track the processes via the Online Manuscript Submission System.

 Peer Review/Responsibility for the Reviewers:

1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author. No self-knowledge of the author(s) must affect their comments and decision.
3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in 500 to 1000 words.
4. Reviewers may identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.