The National Centre for Public Health, which is responsible for the publication of Health Promotion (Hungary), considers the professional credibility of the journal as its primary value, respects editorial autonomy, and does not influence professional decisions on the content of the journal.

Health Promotion (Hungary) is committed to the practice of ethical scientific publishing and therefore adopts and follows the COPE Code of Conduct's recommended practices for editors, reviewers, and authors. Accordingly, we expect the following to be adhered to.

Editorial Office

The editorial staff is responsible for the content published. This is performed by taking into account the needs of readers and authors, partly through surveys and partly through feedback received.

The editorial team is constantly monitoring the development possibilities, expanding and, where possible, optimizing the available features, taking into account the needs of editors and authors. The Open Journal System (OJS) editorial software is used to resolve any bugs as quickly as possible. 

The professional credibility of the journal and the independence of the editors are of paramount importance, and the editors will therefore ensure that the papers published in the journal were selected by professional criteria only. In support of this, authors are required to declare any conflicts of interest, and the research funder, and its role, if any, while peer reviewers are expected to provide objective reviews on time, taking into account the peer review criteria of the journal.

The editorial team will provide the opportunity to correct errors found in already published material in the form of an Erratum alongside the original paper. If necessary, a retraction of the paper, or an apology, may be requested in writing to the Editorial Office, stating the reasons for the request.

The editorial team encourages and supports contributions to published manuscripts.

During the evaluation period, the confidentiality of the manuscripts submitted is ensured by the closed OJS system and the confidentiality obligations imposed on editors and peer reviewers.

Members of the editorial board may submit their manuscripts to the journal, but they will be treated in the same way as any other manuscript. Editorial board members must declare any potential conflict of interest.

Peer reviewers

The Journal of Health Promotion (Hungary) attaches great importance to the work of the peer reviewers, and they will receive a certificate and a letter of thanks for their work.

Manuscripts intended for the Original Publication section are peer reviewed, with one peer reviewer evaluating the manuscript as a whole and another reviewer evaluating the statistical methodology, if necessary. Where appropriate, additional peer reviewers may be involved in the decision-making process. The Journal of Health Promotion (Hungary) uses a double-blind peer review process: the peer reviewer receives the manuscript with all references to the author removed, as much as technically possible. Unless otherwise stated by the peer reviewer, he/she remains anonymous to the author. If a further reviewer comments on the manuscript, he/she will receive the comments of the previous expert(s), with the name(s) omitted. There is no direct communication between the authors and the peer reviewer and the reviews are not made public by the editorial office.

If the peer reviewer feels that he/she cannot objectively evaluate the manuscript or has any conflict of interest, either with the suspected Authors or with the research, he/she is obliged to decline the invitation. Peer reviewers are required to declare, before the preparation of the peer review, that they have no bias or interest in the subject matter, results, or conclusions of the paper that might affect the peer review.

The peer reviewer should strive to ensure that the comments made are objective and supported by professional arguments and evidence. The peer reviewer's opinion on a given problem or research may of course differ from that of the author, but it is always recommended that the resulting opinions are supported by scientific evidence, thereby increasing the acceptance of the dissenting opinion and the professional quality of the manuscript. The peer reviewer should only request a reference to his/her manuscript if there is an absolute professional justification. The peer reviewer should be objective, help the authors to improve the manuscript, and not be offensive in his/her wording. The peer reviewer should endeavor to meet the deadline for the peer review.

The peer reviewer needs to remember that all manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential and may not be shared with third parties without permission. If the involvement of a third party is required for certain issues, this should always be discussed with the responsible editor, who may permit it if necessary.

If the peer reviewer suspects plagiarism or other ethical misconduct in connection with the manuscript, he/she must immediately report it to the journal's editorial office. The COPE Guidelines shall prevail in all matters relating to the ethics of peer review.

Authors

Republication is not generally accepted but may be used in exceptional cases where the material has been presented as a preliminary report (preprint) in the context of a scientific meeting, as an abstract or poster, or as a conference proceeding; or where the work is republished in a different language or adapted for a different readership, provided that both journals have accepted the republication. The manuscript submitted for publication must not include material previously published or submitted for publication elsewhere, or material accepted but not yet published as part of a paper. At the time of submission, the Editorial Board must be informed of the inclusion of material previously published or under consideration in other papers.

Our authors are expected to comply with the requirements for accurate reporting, to clearly indicate the work of others through correct and consistent bibliographic citations, and to declare any potential conflicts of interest. Submitted manuscripts will be subject to plagiarism checks by the editorial office.

The ethical compliance of the research and the communicability of its results, if the research has been granted ethical approval, must be certified by the ethical approval number. If the authors do not have ethics clearance but have carried out research involving human subjects, this mustn't violate the requirements of the Helsinki Declaration. If there are doubts about ethical compliance that the authors cannot adequately clarify, the Editorial Board will not accept the manuscript. Identifiable information about subjects should only be disclosed in the text of the manuscript or in the figures if the subject has given informed consent. The fact of the subject's consent should be indicated in the manuscript. If a breach of ethical principles is raised, the Editorial Board will first consult with the authors to clarify the issues. If necessary, a publication ethics expert will also be sought. If a serious ethical breach is discovered after the publication, the article will be withdrawn.

The editorial board decides on the acceptance of a manuscript for publication based on professional criteria, taking into account the peer review if relevant. The author may appeal against the editorial board's decision to the editor-in-chief, stating his/her reasons.

The person who contributes to the preparation of the manuscript is entitled to authorship if he or she carries out any of the following activities: design or analysis and interpretation of the data; drafting of the article or revision of the main intellectual content of the work; preparation of the final version to be published. Changes to the authors and the order of authorship are possible only if a reasoned request to this effect, signed by all authors and accompanied by their original signatures, is received by the Editorial Office. The corresponding author must declare that the final version of the manuscript has been read and approved by all authors. Participants who are not authors may appear in the Acknowledgements or in a separate Appendix.

When uploading an Original Research, authors have the option to specify which expert(s) they wish to exclude from the peer review process.

If the author or any other person discovers an error or ethical problem after publication, they should notify the Journal immediately. Authors are expected to cooperate in the correction process.