This document outlines the principles that guide our peer review process, ethical standards, and the pursuit of impactful and innovative contributions to the academic community. We invite you to familiarize yourself with our policies and join us in the pursuit of knowledge and academic excellence.

Submitting an article implies that it has not previously been considered for publication in another journal. The publication of the article must be approved by all authors participating in the writing of the article. If the article is accepted, it will not be published anywhere else in the same form in English or any other language. The editors reserve the right to edit and publish according to the set standards. After final editorial check, authors will approve the edited article before it gets published.

To meet the criteria for acceptance, the manuscript should demonstrate advancements within its field, contributing thematically and problematically to the existing literature. It is imperative that the paper clearly justifies its merit for publication in journal Human Research in Rehabilitation.

Review Policy

Manuscripts are considered for review under the condition that the same work will not be published elsewhere. All authors, as well as institutional officers where the author(s) is/are employed, must provide proof that the paper has not been published elsewhere. The necessity of institution’s consent for sensitive article publishing is evaluated by authors themselves but also the responsibility for eventual charges related to publishing articles that institution does not support. If the journal editor requests authorization, authors are expected to respond positively and provide transparent communication. It is understood that any individual cited as a source of personal communication has consented to being cited, however, written authorization may be required at the editor’s discretion.

Review process

Once an article is submitted to the journal, author(s) get reference number and the article is initially screened by article selection committee. Committee is comprised of in-house editors and is rotated periodically. Initial screening checks if article is following journal guidelines, formatted correctly, within journal scope, and is an original contribution that will appeal to the readers. If the committee deems that article is of insufficient general interest or otherwise unsuitable for publication, article is not sent for an external review. Only articles that are likely to meet the editorial criteria are sent to Editor-in-Chief for additional review. After initial approval of Editor-in-Chief, article is sent to two external, independent reviewers. Editor will assign two reviewers to each paper based on their availability and expertise. Authors may be asked to suggest suitable reviewers for the subject of their paper during the submission process. Once review is done, final decision is made on whether article will be accepted, rejected or send back for revision.

Journal uses double blind peer review system. Reviewer identities remain anonymous to authors and reviewers cannot see identity of the author.

The review process usually takes minimum of 2 months from the time of submission. However, if there is an issue, editors may assign additional reviewers and this will lengthen the process.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript for:

  • Originality and scientific contribution to improving knowledge in the field;
  • Study design and methodology are appropriate and described so that others could replicate results;
  • Results are presented in a clear and appropriate manner;
  • Conclusions are reliable and significant;
  • Internal validity (including review of the literature, methods, analysis, and interpretation);
  • Organization and writing style (clear, concise, jargon-free writing)

Reviewers will provide anonymous comments to authors and confidential comments to the editors if needed. The anonymous comments meant for authors will be available to both external reviewers. Reviewers are not expected to correct or edit manuscripts as this will be done by editorial staff.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision to reject or accept the manuscript for publication. The decision will be sent to the author(s) along with the comments from external reviewers.

Authors may be asked to revise their manuscript in accordance with recommendations from the reviewers. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or to alternate reviewers. The Editor-in Chief may request more than one revision of a manuscript. Authors can amend their manuscript in accordance to the comments or can include an explanation of why they disagree on a particular comment.

Authors may ask for article withdrawal before it is accepted for publication. After acceptance significant reasons will have to be provided to editorial board that keeps the right to publish the article regardless.

If the article is accepted, the Journal requires the author, as the rights holder, to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement for all articles we publish. Agreement is a license agreement under which the author retains copyright in the work but grants the journal’s publisher the sole and exclusive right and license to publish for the full legal term of copyright.

If the article is accepted, article processing fee will be requested from the author. This includes editorial processing, language processing, composite tables, images and a color fee if applicable to the print edition. This fee depends on the time and effort required for processing and can amount to 150 euro.

Journal does not retain copies of rejected articles.

All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, anonymous refereeing by independent reviewers, and consequent revision by article authors when required. The published article constitutes the final, definitive, and citable version in the scholarly record.

Conflict of interests in the peer review process

Double blind peer review method, utilised by the journal, aims to mitigate any potential conflict of interest (COI). However, if any COI should occur, following instructions should be adhered to.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by editors or reviewers without the written consent of the author. If an editor or a reviewer finds out that they have a potential COI they should ask for another editor or reviewer respectively to handle given review.

Authors are asked to sign the conflict of interests declaration before the review.

Publishing Ethics

Publishing ethics guidelines are, with the permission form Elsevier, based on, or in some cases, completely aligned with Elsevier policies, and COPE Code Of Conduct guidelines.

Duties of Editors

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

Peer review

Editors should select suitable reviewers and ensure fair, unbiased and timely review process.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, or other editorial advisers. Unless reviewers have agreed to disclose their names in some special circumstances, editor must protect reviewers’ identities.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation will always accept communication from institutions, readers and reviewers and respond promptly to findings of research misconduct. If this is to occur, editorial board will investigate the claims.

Editor will inform author(s) of the given claims and if need be, journal will request an institutional investigation.

If there is a valid concern regarding the published work in question, journal may consider publishing expression of concern, and after investigation is done, publish the results of the investigation as well.

Paper will be retracted if editorial board is convinced of the misconduct. Retracted articles will remain online but marked as retracted.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also assist the author in improving the paper through the editorial communications. All reviewers are required to adhere to the following:


Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviews should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.

Reviewer misconduct

Editors will take reviewer’s misconduct seriously and investigate any evidence of confidentiality breach, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (both financial and non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of severe reviewer misconduct (e.g. plagiarism) will be taken to the institutional level.

Journal endorses and strongly encourages reviewers to adhere to COPE Code Of Conduct guidelines for reviewers.

Duties of Authors

Authorship and contribution

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. We encourage to list other participants (e.g. contributors to language editing) in the acknowledgements section.

Originality and acknowledgement of source

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original article, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data.

If the article is found to be plagiarized or included copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article (removing it from the journal).

Data sharing and reporting

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Author Declaration

Before publishing, all authors will have to sign a declaration, with the following content.

  • Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article. This article has no conflicts of interests and has never been published before.
  • Open Access: I agree that my article may be of interest to all interested people to use for reading and citation without charge.
  • Funding: The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
  • Declaration of plagiarism: I agree that the Journal is not liable for any form of plagiarizing, and the sole responsibility for such actions lies upon the author of the article.


Plagiarism is committed when one author uses another work (typically the work of another author) without permission, credit, or acknowledgment. Plagiarism in any of its forms (literal copying, substantial copying and paraphrasing) is unacceptable. Any manuscript that uses any form of plagiarism will be rejected or retracted if already published. Plagiarism complaints can be submitted to journal email.

Conflict of interests

A conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that unduly influence (bias) his or her actions (such relationships are also known as dual obligations, competing interests, or competing loyalties). These relationships vary from those with negligible potential to those with high potential to influence judgment. Not all relationships present a true conflict of interest. The potential for a conflict of interest may exist regardless of whether the individual believes the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Financial relationships are the easiest conflicts of interest to recognize. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Copyright infringement

All complaints regarding copyright infringement should be sent to the Editor at with the title “Copyright infringement”.

The request must be supported by documented evidence of the same version of an article that was published or copyrighted or patented by the complainant prior to the date of publication of the article in our journal. Upon receipt of the complaint, journal management, informs the author and performs detailed investigation.

Journal reserves the sole right to decide on the validity of such requests. After consideration, if the request is found to be justified, the manuscript in question will be removed from all HRR archives and servers. All subsequent printed copies of that issue will not contain the article.

All copyright claims will be handled with the highest priority.

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies

Utilization of AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing articles should be limited to improving readability and language. AI should not be used to generate complete articles and to produce scientific insights, draw scientific conclusions. If this is discovered during review, article will be rejected without possibility of resubmission.

Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies and a statement will appear in the published work.

Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author.


Author retains copyright in the work but grants the journal’s publisher the sole and exclusive right and license to publish for the full legal term of copyright. This ensures that requests from third parties to reproduce articles are handled efficiently and consistently and will also allow the article to be as widely disseminated as possible. As part of the license agreement, authors may use their own material in other publications, provided that the journal is acknowledged as the original place of publication and the Institute for Human Rehabilitation is acknowledged as the publisher.

Open access

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. By agreeing with the immediate Open Access policy of paper publications, the author gives permission for making the final version of paper available online to readers without any embargo period.

All articles are distributed through a Creative Commons (CC BY NC) License.


Our budget does not allow us to hire WCAG teams but, we have done our best to make our website as accessible as possible for all our readers. If you encounter any problems or have suggestions for improvement, please feel free to contact us. We will try to do everything we can to make this site as clear and accessible as possible.

Handling complaints

Any complaints against journal procedures, policies, review process, editors or reviewers and charges should be submitted to journal email with clear explanation of the complaint. Journal management will address the claim as soon as possible and work to resolve it fairly and objectively. If necessary, other institutions can be involved in resolving the matter.


The scientific articles published in journal Human Research in Rehabilitation present the opinions of authors and will not be considered as the opinion of the Editorial Board of the journal.

The originality, proofreading of manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors.


  1. COPE code of conduct
  2. COPE – Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
  3. COPE – Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
  4. Elsevier Publishing Ethics
  5. Elsevier Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for editors