Editorial & Publishing Policies

Aim and Scope

Global Health Action is an international peer-reviewed Open Access journal affiliated with the Umeå Centre for Global Health Research (UCGHR) at Umeå University, Sweden, and published by Co-Action Publishing. The UCGHR is the research arm of the Unit of Epidemiology and Global Health, which also hosts the Umeå International School of Public Health, the Swedish Research School for Global Health, and the WHO Collaborating Centre for Verbal Autopsy.

Vision: Our vision is to be a leading journal in the global health field, narrowing health information gaps and contributing to the implementation of policies and actions that lead to improved global health.

Aim: The widening gap between the winners and losers of globalisation presents major public health challenges. To meet these challenges it is crucial to generate new knowledge and evidence in the field and in settings where the evidence is lacking, as well as to bridge the gaps between existing knowledge and implementation of relevant findings.  Thus the aim of Global Health Action is to contribute to fuelling a more concrete, hands-on approach to addressing global health challenges. Manuscripts suggesting strategies for practical interventions where none already exist are specifically welcomed. Further, the journal encourages articles from low- and middle-income countries, while also welcoming South-South and South-North collaborations. All articles are expected to address a global agenda and include a strong implementation or policy component.

Scope: Global Health Action publishes Original Research articles, Review articles, Short Communications and Current Debate articles. Special niches within Global Health Action include articles on Capacity Building, Study Designs and a Methods Forum, as well as PhD reviews with invited commentaries. These are described in our Authors’ Guidelines. If manuscripts are received that are not up to the standard required for publication in the Journal, but relate to research that has publication potential, the author(s) may be offered mentorship from a senior academic who will work collaboratively to improve the manuscript. In such cases the mentor will be named in the published article as a Contributing Editor.


Section Policies


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Guest Editorials

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Invited Editorials

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Original Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Invited Original Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Invited Review Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

PhD Reviews

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Methods Forum

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Study Design Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Capacity Building

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Current Debates

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Communications

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process


One of the executive editors will screen each submitted manuscript to Global Health Action. We are looking for a high-quality manuscript which: (i) presents original research results within the field of global health, (ii) is well-motivated, designed appropriately with valid data collection methods, analysed using state-of-art methods, and (iii) contextualizes the findings within appropriate public health policy context and suggests concrete action(s) for the population, policymakers, and other stakeholders.

Manuscripts may be rejected directly by the Editor or in consultation with section editors, if one of the following weaknesses is identified:

  1. The manuscript did not pass the plagiarism detection test using iThenticate software. The test will show if the manuscript consists of text published elsewhere without proper citations. The test will also indicate whether the paper, in full or part, has been previously published in a different format (for example as a project report or a conference presentation).
  2. The manuscript is out of the scope of global health. For example, the manuscript is too clinical (unless there are clear public health implications), it is focused on animal studies, it is too technical for a general readership, or it has only local significance (unless there is a clearly stated and justifiable proposal for wider implementation).
  3. The study lacks scientific originality.
  4. There is no clear ‘evidence-based’ rationale for the work. The manuscript does not include references to similar work or the need for work in this area.
  5. The authors have not explained the significance/importance of their work. The manuscript does not include a specific research question or a clear statement of intent.
  6. The study methods are neither valid nor reliable. The study design does not clearly address the research question. There are flaws in the study design or data collection that cannot be easily corrected.
  7. The study does not use the most recent or best available data, or the authors do not present a justification for using historical material.
  8. The study cannot be contextualized within a current public health policy context.
  9. The study, which uses primary data that are collected by local researcher(s) in low- or middle-income countries and are not publicly available and the data, does not include any local researcher(s) as co-authors.
  10. The manuscript is not well structured (as per GHA Author Guidelines). The manuscript has poor English grammar, style, and syntax. The references are not up-to-date or relevant.

For quantitative studies:

  1. The study includes a survey with low response rates that are not justified. Other issues arising from bias are not adequately explained or addressed.
  2. The study is based on a small selected population. The results allow inference of marginal impact only within this small population.

For qualitative studies:

  1. The qualitative design cannot be understood from reading the manuscript.
  2. The manuscript lacks analytical rigour that cannot be corrected. There is no section in the manuscript that clearly explains how the study was conducted and how the data were analysed.


When manuscripts pass through the initial screening, they are subject to rigorous peer review so as to ensure that the research published is 'good science'. As of October 2015, we do not ask authors to suggest potential reviewers. Manuscripts are sent out for review electronically, and all correspondence takes place via e-mail. Manuscripts are sent to at least two independent reviewers. See our Reviewer Guidelines.

Global Health Action has a 'single blind' review process: The peer reviewers’ identity remains unknown to the authors; however, a reviewer may choose to review his/her identity at a later stage. Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinion on a number of issues pertinent to the scientific and formal aspects of a manuscript, and to judge manuscripts on grounds of originality and public health relevance. All relevant information will be forwarded to the author(s).

Peer reviewers can make one of the following recommendations for the editors to consider:  

  1. Accept manuscript (i.e., no need for any revision)
  2. Accept after revision (i.e., can be accepted if the author makes the requested minor revisions)
  3. Revise and resubmit (i.e., can be accepted or rejected after major revisions have been made – the manuscript may be sent out for another peer review round)
  4. Submit elsewhere (i.e., the manuscript is better suited for another journal)
  5. Reject manuscript (i.e., the manuscript is sub-standard)
  6. See comments (i.e., the reviewer cannot choose from any of the above)

When asking for revisions, reviewers have two possible goals: to ask authors to tighten their arguments based on existing data, or to identify areas where more data are needed. Formal revision may be required if the language or style is sub-standard. To facilitate rapid publication, authors are given a maximum of two weeks for minor revisions and four weeks for major revisions, with possible extensions of up to 6 weeks, after which time the revised manuscripts will be rejected and can only be re-considered as new submissions.


Publication Frequency

All articles to Global Health Action are posted online immediately as they are ready for publication. All articles will be assigned a DOI number (Digital Object Identifier) whereby they become searchable and citeable without delay.


Open Access Policy

Global Health Action is published Open Access under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 license. For more information see the copyright section.

Articles are published immediately upon the final corrections of the master proof having been made. All articles are assigned a DOI number (Digital Object Identifier).

Global Health Action is accessible via the journal’s website at www.globalhealthaction.net as well as via international search engines such as Google Scholar.

OAI metadata harvesting for this journal can be reached via the following link:




This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.

In addition, all files will be archived with PubMed Central, CLOCKSS and Portico.


Author Self-Archiving

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post items submitted to this journal on personal or institutional websites, prior to and after publication (while providing the bibliographic details of that publication)