ISSN 2612-6818 - Padova University Press

Ethic Code

JHCEP emerges from the collaboration of five open minded women (academic researchers, teachers and health educators), who will select the authors’ contributions without distinction of sex, skin color, sex orientation, religious or political preferences.
This journal endorses the principle of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child.
The Editors express their support to vaccine diffusion, recognize the right of any women to freely decide about practice of abortion, and think that a dying woman or man has the civil right to choose the way and the time he/she will die.
Concerning editing ethic, JHCEP shares the following principles



The Code of Ethics of Health Care Education in Practice responds to and complies with the current guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for an ethical approach to the publication of scientific works. The entire management of the journal is in accordance with the spirit of the COPE recommendations to take all possible measures against misconduct and to ensure good ethical practice in the publication process.

Duties of the editors and editorial board

Decisions on publication

Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal. The submission to the Journal it is also based on an anonymous single blind peer review by an expert reviewer. The editorial board is bound by the legal provisions in force concerning defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Fairness and non-discrimination

Publication is based on the scientific value, relevance, and originality of the content of the article without discrimination on grounds of sex, race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, sexual orientation, gender identity, age or political orientation of the authors.
A description of peer review will be communicated to the authors, and editors are ready to justify any important deviation from the described processes.
Hcep journal encourage ethical research (e.g., research involving humans or animals).

Privacy, conflict of interest and prohibition of use or disclosure

Editors have a system to ensure that material submitted to our journal remains confidential while under review and guarantee that peers’ reviews at our journal is fair, unbiased and timely. Appropriate reviewers that can judge the work free from disqualifying competing interests are selected for submissions.

Duties of Authors of articles submitted to the Journal

Scientific originality

The Authors guarantee that the article submitted for evaluation is unpublished, scientifically original and not submitted simultaneously to other journals. Manuscripts under evaluation should not be submitted to other journals for publication. Authors are required to adequately cite the texts used following the editorial rules indicated for publication in the Hcep Journal, taking care that the work and/or words of other authors are adequately paraphrased or quoted literally with appropriate evidence of the sources.

Integrating the work

The editors may ask the Authors to make corrections and additions they deem appropriate, also following the anonymous evaluation of the reviewers. The editors reserve the right to make purely editorial changes after the first proofreading, in order to ensure the homogeneity of the Journal's publication.
When authors identify a relevant error or inaccuracy in one the article, they must promptly inform the Editorial Board and provide it with all the necessary information to indicate the necessary corrections.
Study protocols for original works must be authorised in advance by the authors' ethics committees of reference, and research must be conducted according to ethical standards with specific reference to the Declaration of Helsinki for clinical research, the AERA and BERA guidelines for educational research.


The authors accurately write down the list that reflect who did the work, the share of each Author must be correctly and clearly indicated.

Conflicts of interest

Authors must not have any conflicts of interest that might have influenced their results, theses or interpretations. Authors must also indicate the financial backers, if any, of the research or project from which the article derives.

Duties of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decision

Peer-review is a process that helps the Journal's editors to assess the scientific quality of proposed articles and also allows the author to improve their contribution.

Adherence to deadlines

A reviewer who does not feel adequate or sufficiently qualified for the task of reviewing the research in the manuscript, or who feels unable to review it within the specified timeframe, must notify the journal management as soon as possible and withdraw from the review process.

Fairness and objectivity

The peer review must be carried out in a fair and objective manner. Referees are asked to give adequate reasons for their assessment of the article submitted. Any personal judgement of the author is inappropriate: it is not permitted to criticise or offend an author personally. Comments must be technically well formulated and cannot be construed as criticism of an ideological nature or, in any case, contain scientific or cultural assumptions of a personal nature

Conflict of interest and disclosure

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with anyone.
Reviewers are required not to accept for reading articles for which a conflict of interest arises due to previous specific collaborative or competitive relationships with the Author (unknown in itself, but nevertheless identified by deduction) and/or connections with authors, entities or institutions related to the manuscript.