Editors Guidelines
Clear expectations for editorial leadership and decision making.
Editor Guidance
Maintain quality, fairness, and impact in the review process.
Publishing Standards
Open Access Reach
All articles are immediately available worldwide, supporting clinicians, researchers, and public health teams.
Rigorous Review
Single blind peer review with editorial oversight ensures methodological and ethical integrity.
DOI and Metadata
Structured metadata and DOI registration improve discoverability across scholarly platforms.
Ethics First
We prioritize patient consent, data transparency, and adherence to international research guidelines.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors guide peer review, ensure scope alignment, and maintain fairness across submissions. Decisions should be grounded in scientific rigor and clinical relevance.
Decision Criteria
Editors evaluate submissions based on clarity, methodology, and patient impact.
- Alignment with cervical cancer prevention or care
- Quality of study design and reporting
- Ethics compliance and transparency
- Novelty and contribution to practice
Timelines and Communication
Editors should provide timely decisions and communicate clearly with reviewers and authors. Prompt handling supports rapid knowledge dissemination.
Ethics Oversight
Editors monitor conflicts of interest and ensure adherence to research ethics policies. Suspected misconduct should be escalated to the editorial office.
Additional Context
Editors are encouraged to provide clear decision rationales that help authors strengthen reporting and clinical relevance. Consistent feedback improves journal standards over time.
Conflict of interest disclosures should be reviewed before assigning reviewers. Editorial independence ensures fair and balanced decisions.
When needed, editors may request statistical or methodological review to support high quality evaluations of complex cervical cancer studies.
Cervical cancer research benefits from clear reporting of population characteristics, including age distribution, screening history, and vaccination status. This context helps readers interpret generalizability and informs policy decisions.
When describing interventions, explain how they align with clinical guidelines or public health recommendations. Contextualizing findings supports translation into care pathways.
Transparent reporting of funding sources and resource constraints helps readers assess feasibility in different settings. This is critical for global health adoption.
Where possible, include discussion of equity impacts and strategies to reduce disparities in screening or treatment access.
High quality visual summaries and clear tables improve uptake by clinicians and program managers. Provide succinct interpretations for key outputs.
JCC Commitment
Journal of Cervical Cancer is dedicated to advancing cervical cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment through transparent publishing.
Our editorial office supports authors, reviewers, and readers with clear guidance and responsive communication. Contact [email protected] for scope or workflow questions.
Support Editorial Excellence
Help strengthen cervical cancer research quality and transparency.
