Author Guidelines

Ensure that the manuscript presents an academic value, the significance of the research, as well as its originality and practical significance; the manuscript contributes to previous research on the topic. The author must carefully review the manuscript requirements. They are not too rigid, but we recommend meeting them. As a result, we ask that the authors make every effort to meet the requirements, as this will improve the quality of their materials and make it easier for the editorial staff to approve the manuscript for publication.

Please define the type of manuscript from four possible variants and follow both the general guidelines and the recommendations that are specific to the type of manuscript chosen.

The types of manuscripts that can be submitted to the journal are original research papers, case studies, technical reports, conference reports, review articles, systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses, editorials, critical book reviews, comments, and letters to the editor. See the section policies.

The manuscript should be sent to the journal via submission.

Please make every effort to submit a manuscript in good English. Editors and reviewers will be able to focus on the academic value of well-written manuscripts.

Title

The title should be:

concise and specific (not more than 15 words).
intrigue the reader's interest and be written in a scientific style.
appropriate for the journal's subject matter (journal’s scope area).
express the topic of the manuscript clearly.
emphasize the importance of the study without including any unnecessary description.

Author (authors)

The names of the authors, job title, affiliation (department, faculty, university, or the organization to which they belong), and country should be indicated. Also, the author(s) should indicate their e-mails and ORCID.

The list of authors includes only those who have really taken part in the research and agreed to bear full responsibility for its content. While forming the list of authors, special attention should be paid to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) principles.

Abstract

The abstract should be:

a brief and simple explanation of the introduction, methods, results, and conclusions.
complete enough to stand on its own.
contain 200–250 words.

The abstract should not:

contain the material that is absent in the paper.
contain any extraneous information.
use the sentences from the paper's text.
including quantitative findings in the analysis.
refer to any sources in the abstract.
use tables and figures.
contain non-standard or unusual abbreviations, but if important, they should be identified when first mentioned in the abstract.

Keywords

The keywords should be:

reflect the area of the research.
contain 3-5 keywords (can be words or word groups).

The keywords should not replicate words from the title of the manuscript.

Introduction

The introduction should:

clearly summarized the current state of the topic.
contain the gaps in current knowledge in this field.
clear why the study was needed.
clearly defines the goal of the study and is consistent with the rest of the manuscript.
clearly state the specific and relevant research question.

Methods

The methods should:

be relevant to the research question.
contain enough information to run the experiments or research again.
clear information on how samples were obtained or participants were chosen.
state if there is any possibility of bias in the sample or in the participant recruitment.
include the proper controls and validation.
considered any potentially confounding factors.
contain the study's time frame.
have enough power and relevant statistics.
state any ethical concerns.

Results

The results should:

present in a clear and accurate manner.
be consistent with the methods.
included all relevant data.
use related figures, tables, graphs, or schemes to help the reader comprehend the result.
make the text consistent with the information in the figures, tables, graphs, or schemes.

The results should not:

have any information that could identify the participants.
make an interpretation of the results obtained in this section.
make any comparisons with previous research results.

Discussion

The discussion should:

provide a logical explanation for their findings (the interpretation of the results obtained during the research).
compare your findings to previous studies.
discussed the implications of the findings for future research and potential applications.
provide a novelty in the field of science or practical knowledge.

The discussion should not:

be repetitive of the text in the result sections.
contain numerical findings.
contain any literature review.

Conclusion

The conclusion should be:

consistent with the earlier-mentioned data results.
stated any study limitations.

The conclusion should not:

be repetitive of the text in the earlier sections.

Tables and figures

The tables and figures should:

be of high quality and created by the author. Poor definition or resolution are not acceptable.
be numbered separately. (Tables 1 and 2; Figures 1 and 2).
have a title and be presented on their own page at the end of the manuscript.
have permission from the original publisher or the copyright holder if reproduced from previously published work.
be presented in a clear and relevant manner.
contain information that is consistent with the text description.
have figure legends and table headings that clearly explain the table and figure.
include any relevant statistics, such as sample size, uncertainty measures, standard error, and confidence intervals.

References

The references should:

include all citations from the text.
be current.
include the reference's original source.
use the latest APA style.

The references should not contain self-citations exceed 10% for an author, 20% for co-authors together, and 15% for Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR).

Author Fee

The Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) does not charge any publication fees.