Information For Authors
Aims and Scope
The Journal of One Health Systems (JOHS) welcomes submissions that promote equity at the intersection of human and pet health. Submissions may employ quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches. Authors are encouraged to select study designs that reflect the complexity of their research questions—especially those rooted in community-based, interdisciplinary, or equity-centered frameworks. As applicable, submissions should include a clear description of the methods, a rationale for their use, and documentation of ethical review or approval.
JOHS approaches One Health through a practical, systems-based framework that emphasizes the social determinants of health and the lived experiences of households. JOHS prioritizes submissions that:
- Expand equitable access to care for all members of the family—human and pet.
- Integrate social services within veterinary and human health systems.
- Address structural, geographic, and economic barriers to care.
- Showcase effective cross-sector partnerships and innovations.
- Evaluate policies, programs, or systems that impact pet-inclusive households.
Its editorial scope is organized around a four-sector model, which connects efforts across:
- Health and Well-Being
Aligns and strengthens veterinary, human, and social care systems to promote the comprehensive health and well-being of pet families, recognizing the interconnected needs of people and their pets. - Economic and Community Support
Mobilizes funders, nonprofits, employers, and financial systems to reduce cost-related barriers and invest in the infrastructure that supports pet family health. This sector fosters inclusive, community-based solutions that improve access to care and long-term stability. - Housing, Transportation, and Infrastructure
Addresses logistical and structural barriers that limit access to care and stability for pet families. This sector supports pet-inclusive housing, transportation to care services, and reliable delivery of essential supplies. - Education, Policy, and Research
Advances sustainable change through training, applied research, and policy that center pet families within care systems. This sector informs evidence-based models, inclusive community design, and One Health integration across disciplines.
Guided by this interdisciplinary approach, JOHS supports the development of coordinated, inclusive care systems that promote the health, stability, and unity of pet families.
Types of Manuscripts
JOHS accepts a range of manuscript types that contribute to the advancement of health equity across pet family systems, human-pet care interfaces, and integrated care infrastructure. Before preparing your submission, please review our About This Journal page to ensure your work aligns with JOHS’s scope and priorities.
See our Manuscript Preparation Guidelines for detailed guidance on recommended section headings, formatting, and other requirements.
Original Research
Empirical studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches. Submissions must include a clear research question and describe Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions.
- Word limit: 7500 (excluding abstract, references, tables/figures)
- Abstract: Structured, ≤300 words
- Author limit: 8
Short Research Report
Concise studies with informative findings relevant to JOHS themes.
- Word limit: 3000
- Abstract: Structured, ≤300 words
- References: ≤10
- Author limit: 8
Review
Systematic or expert reviews of the literature. Systematic reviews must include, in the Methods section, a detailed description of the search strategy and inclusion/exclusion criteria, and should cite PRISMA where applicable. All reviews should describe article evaluation methods.
- Word limit: 5000
- Abstract: Strucutred, ≤300 words
- Author limit: 8
Special Report
Papers addressing emergent or complex topics of broad interest within our interdisciplinary framework. This may include case studies, cross-sector models, or innovative curricula designed to improve outcomes for pet families and care systems.
- Word limit: 3000
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 8
Editorial
Commissioned perspectives or reflections from thought leaders on timely issues aligned with JOHS’s mission.
- Word limit: 1500 (unless otherwise negotiated)
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 2
Prior approval from the Editor-in-Chief is required.
Viewpoint
Evidence-informed or well-argued opinion pieces that offer critical reflections on policies, practices, or concepts related to pet family care and One Health equity.
- Word limit: 1500
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 5
Innovation
Reports of pilot programs, novel strategies, or applied interventions that have been implemented but are not yet supported by extensive evaluation.
- Word limit: 1000
- Abstract: ≤150 words
A single data table may be included. References exceeding 3 count toward word limit.
Policy Pearl
Practical insights from policy development, implementation, or analysis across health, housing, veterinary, social services, and education.
- Word limit: 1500
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 6
Policy Proposal
JOHS considers policy proposals that are grounded in stakeholder consultations, literature reviews, or consensus-building processes. Policy proposals should outline actionable recommendations and a clear rationale for adoption. This category is suitable for authors advancing systems-level solutions to address gaps or inequities in care delivery. Proposals focused solely on individual opinion should instead be submitted as a Viewpoint
- Word limit: 2500
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 6
Meeting Report
Reports from relevant professional convenings, including conference summaries, research symposia, or stakeholder coalitions. Include agenda or sample abstracts if appropriate.
- Word limit: 2000
- Abstract: ≤100 words
- Author limit: 8
Prior approval from the Editor-in-Chief is required.
Task Force Report
Reports from professional societies, networks, or working groups on major policy, research, or practice developments. Includes meeting summaries of relevant conference sessions or organizational convenings, including abstracts, session highlights, or key decisions.
- Word limit: 1500 (unless otherwise negotiated)
- Abstract: ≤150 words
- Author limit: 8
Prior approval from the Editor-in-Chief is required.
Education Research
Empirical studies examining teaching, training, or professional development related to One Health and integrated pet-family care systems. Suitable submissions include evaluations of curricula, instructional methods, simulation or field-based training, learner outcomes, or competency frameworks. Reports should present clear research questions and describe Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions, following appropriate reporting standards (eg, MMARS for mixed methods, or SRQR for qualitative studies).
- Word limit: 5000
- Abstract: Structured, ≤300 words
- Author limit: 8
Curricula
Practical, reproducible educational resources that advance One Health competencies across human, animal, and environmental health. May include full courses, modules, workshops, or training programs. Submissions must state clear learning objectives and, in the Methods section, describe the curriculum design framework, target audience, delivery format, timeline, and required resources. The Implementation section must confirm prior implementation with the target learners and provide a step-by-step description, including facilitator guidance. The Evaluation section must include outcomes data, learner feedback, and/or qualitative assessment.
Supplemental materials are required (eg, lesson plans, facilitator guides, slide decks with speaker notes, handouts, assessments, and any multimedia) and must be publication-ready, accessible (eg, captions/transcripts, alt text), and provided in commonly used formats. All authors must meet ICMJE authorship criteria; IRB or equivalent oversight is required for any learner data reported, with de-identification and consent for any images/audio/video of learners. Third-party content must have permissions or a compatible open license. Supplemental materials are published under the same CC BY 4.0 license as the article.
- Word limit: 3000
- Abstract: Structured, ≤300 words
- Author limit: 8
Letter to the Editor
Brief, focused responses or observations, especially those engaging with previously published JOHS content. Letters are screened and approved at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief and do not undergo external peer review. Once accepted, they are assigned a DOI, lightly copyedited for clarity, and indexed alongside other JOHS content, ensuring they form part of the permanent scholarly record.
- Word limit: 500
- References: ≤5
- No abstract required
- Author limit: 2
Invited Article
Submitted at the request of the Editorial Office. Invited Articles may vary in format, number of authors, and length. All Invited Articles undergo peer review.
Authorship Criteria
Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to all four components mentioned below:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
- Final approval of the version to be published; and
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Author order should reflect the relative contributions of each contributor to the study and manuscript. Once a manuscript has been submitted, changes to the author list or order require written consent from all listed authors.
JOHS prescribes a maximum number of authors for each manuscript type, based on its scope and the number of institutions involved (see Manuscript Preparation Guidelines). If the number of authors exceeds these limits, the authors must provide a justification at the time of submission.
Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests
A conflict of interest exists whenever an individual has financial interests or personal relationships that might consciously or unconsciously influence his or her decisions. Conflicts of interest / competing interests are ubiquitous and cannot be completely eliminated; they do not, by themselves, indicate improper behavior, wrongdoing, or scientific misconduct. Financial relationships are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and include, among other things, ownership, employment, consultancies, honoraria, paid expert testimony, grants, patents, stock ownership or options, and service as an officer or board member. Other types of conflicts of interest include personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual beliefs.
JOHS reserves the right to reject any manuscript if a conflict of interest / competing interest poses a risk to the integrity of the review or publication process.
Authors
All authors must disclose all conflicts of interest / competing interests they may have with publication of the manuscript, or an institution or product mentioned in the manuscript and/or is important to the outcome of the study presented. Authors should also disclose conflicts of interest / competing interests with products that compete with those mentioned in their manuscript. For more information, see Manuscript Preparation Guidelines.
Peer Reviewers
Reviewers will be asked if they have any conflicts of interest / competing interests that could complicate their review. Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript and should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work they are reviewing before its publication to further their own interests.
Editors and Journal Team
Editors who make decisions about manuscripts will recuse themselves if they have conflicts of interest / competing interests or relationships that pose potential conflicts related to articles under consideration. Other editorial team members who participate in editorial decisions must provide the Editor-in-Chief with a current description of their financial interests or other conflicts (as they might relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists. No member of the editorial staff is permitted to use information gained through working with manuscripts for private gain.
JOHS upholds the principle of editorial independence. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial content of the journal, including decisions regarding publication, peer review, and revisions. The views expressed in published articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of JOHS, the Program for Pet Health Equity (PPHE), the University of Tennessee, or any supporting funders—unless explicitly stated as official positions.
While JOHS is hosted by the University of Tennessee in partnership with PPHE and receives support from external funders, these relationships do not influence editorial decisions. No funding organization participates in or interferes with the selection, evaluation, or editing of submitted content. This includes both direct influence and indirect influence through organizational pressures or expectations.
Submission of Manuscripts
During submission, authors must:
- Select which of JOHS’s four sectors the manuscript addresses (used for indexing and display).
- Provide 2–3 suggested peer reviewers (name, affiliation, institutional email). Reviewers must be independent of the authors. Editors may select reviewers other than those suggested.
Authors will upload the following files:
- Cover Letter: .doc, .docx, or .rtf
- Blinded Article File: .doc, .docx, or .rtf
- Conflict of Interest Form(s): ICMJE Disclosure of Interest for each author (retained for recordkeeping; not published)
- Supplemental Materials (if applicable): Publication-ready, accessible (eg, captions/transcripts for media, alt text for images), and provided in standard formats (eg, .docx, .pptx, .pdf, .mp4)
Always consult the Manuscript Preparation Guidelines before submitting.
If you encounter issues with submission, contact the editorial office at johs@utk.edu.
Preprint and Prior Publication Policy
JOHS accepts submissions previously posted as preprints on servers that clearly label content as not peer reviewed, require disclosures, and allow linking to subsequent publications.
- Conference presentation, abstract, or poster (conference name, city, date).
- Preprint server posting (eg, bioRxiv, medRxiv) with DOI or URL.
- White paper, technical report, or other publicly available but non–peer-reviewed material.
Authors must provide full citations or links where available. These forms of dissemination do not constitute prior publication and are permitted as long as the work has not undergone peer review and is not under copyright with another publisher.
Anti-Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, words, data, or creative expression—whether published or unpublished—without appropriate citation, attribution, or acknowledgment. This includes reusing one's own previously published material (self-plagiarism) without proper citation, reproducing content from abstracts, reports, grant applications, presentations, or manuscripts, and presenting it as original work.
JOHS is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical publication and scientific conduct. Any instance of plagiarism—whether accidental or intentional—prompts action from the editorial office. Any specific response will depend on the severity and timing of the offense.
Minor or Inadvertent Duplication
In cases when overlap is limited and appears unintentional, JOHS seeks to preserve the author’s work while upholding ethical standards:
- The editorial office will contact the authors for clarification.
- Authors may be asked to revise passages, improve citations, or otherwise address the duplication.
- At this stage, the goal is corrective rather than punitive, ensuring accurate attribution without compromising the integrity of legitimate scholarship.
Substantial or Deliberate Plagiarism
When the editorial team identifies clear, significant copying that suggests intent to mislead, the manuscript is dealt with decisively:
- The submission is rejected outright.
- No opportunity for revision or resubmission is offered.
- This policy underscores JOHS’s commitment to originality and academic honesty.
Plagiarism Discovered After Publication
If plagiarism comes to light after an article has been published, JOHS follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to resolve the matter transparently and responsibly:
- A formal investigation is launched, involving editorial leadership and, when appropriate, external experts.
- If plagiarism is confirmed, the article is retracted, and a public notice is issued.
- The authors’ affiliated institutions and funding bodies are notified to ensure accountability beyond the journal.
- A detailed record of the case is maintained in accordance with COPE standards, reinforcing JOHS’s dedication to long-term research integrity.
Authors are expected to:
- Diligently attribute all sources and clearly distinguish their own contributions from prior work.
- Reference reused methods, findings, language, or conceptual frameworks, even from their own previously published work.
- Review their manuscripts carefully for accidental similarity or uncited borrowing before submission.
For comprehensive guidance on citation practices and the ethical use of others’ intellectual property, authors are encouraged to consult the ICMJE recommendations.
To report a concern about potential plagiarism in JOHS submissions or publications, please contact the editorial office at johs@utk.edu.
Use of AI Tools in Manuscript Preparation
JOHS follows ICMJE guidance on AI use. Authors must disclose AI-assisted technologies at submission. Writing assistance should be reported in the Cover Page Footnote section of Submission Form; data analysis, figure generation, or other substantive use should be described in Methods. AI systems may not be listed as authors or cited as sources. All permitted uses must be independently reviewed and verified by the authors for accuracy, originality, and compliance with copyright and ethical standards.
Acceptable uses include:
- Language refinement: grammar, clarity, or style adjustments.
- Data visualization: creating tables, flowcharts, or basic graphs that do not contain photographic or illustrative elements, provided the underlying data is accurate, verifiable, and properly attributed.
- Summarizing non-confidential content: condensing background materials or literature from publicly available, non-sensitive sources.
- Non-generative image enhancement: using tools to adjust contrast, remove backgrounds, or combine elements in existing photographs or illustrations, provided the use is disclosed in the figure legend.
All permitted uses must be independently reviewed and verified by the authors for accuracy, originality, and compliance with copyright and ethical standards.
AI and AI-assisted technologies must not be listed as an author or co-author, nor cited as an author. Authors must be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in text and images produced by AI. Humans must ensure appropriate attribution of all quoted material, including full citations.
Disclosure Requirements
Authors must disclose any use of AI-assisted tools—such as large language models (eg, ChatGPT, Grok), chatbots, or image generators—during manuscript preparation.
Example:
“Artificial intelligence tools (ChatGPT, GPT-4o; OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) were used to assist with [eg, language editing]. The authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript.”
Disclosure is required in the following locations:
- Cover Page Footnote section of Submission Form: for general use (eg, drafting support, analytic assistance, or AI contributions).
- Methods section of manuscript (if applicable). This may include using AI for data collection, analysis, or figure generation.
AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors. Authors are fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and ethical integrity of all submitted content. Manuscripts must be free of plagiarism, bias, and violations of privacy or confidentiality. No confidential, personal, or sensitive data may be entered into AI platforms.
Generative AI in Figures and Images
Because generative AI image creation raises legal, copyright, and research integrity concerns, JOHS permits AI-generated figures or images only under specific conditions. This policy applies to photographs, diagnostic or clinical images, videos and video stills, scientific or educational illustrations (including infographics, composites, and photo-illustrations), and editorial artwork (2D or 3D renderings).
Any approved AI-generated image must be:
- Clearly labeled in the figure legend.
- Disclosed in the appropriate section (see Disclosure Requirements).
- When technically possible, identified in the image file metadata.
Misuse of AI Tools
Examples of AI misuse include:
- Failing to disclose AI use.
- Using AI to generate substantial manuscript content (eg, data, analysis, interpretive claims) without disclosure.
- Producing AI-generated images or figures outside the permitted exceptions.
- Any AI use that compromises research ethics, authorship standards, copyright, or confidentiality.
Failure to disclose or inappropriate use of AI tools may result in rejection, correction, or retraction, in accordance with JOHS policies and COPE guidance.
Copyrights
All content of JOHS is protected by a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). By submitting a manuscript to JOHS, the corresponding author affirms that all co-authors have authorized the submission and agreement to the CC BY license. The submission also confirms that the manuscript is original work, has not been previously published, and is not under consideration elsewhere.
Authors may deposit the preprint, accepted manuscript, or final published version of their article in institutional or funder repositories, personal websites, or other archives, provided the final published version is properly cited and linked to the article DOI. All versions fall under the CC BY 4.0 license.
The Editorial Process
Timelines
JOHS is committed to a timely and transparent review process.
Standard intervals are as follows:
- Initial Screening: within 10 business days of submission.
- Peer Reviewer Assignment: invitations sent promptly; if no response within 5 business days, the associate editor is notified to identify alternatives.
- Peer Review Reports: reviewers are asked to return comments within 14 business days of accepting an assignment.
- Final Decision: the associate editor compiles reviewer input and provides a recommendation, after which the Editor-in-Chief issues the final decision. This stage is typically completed within 45 business days of reviewer assignment.
Authors will be informed of any delays and may withdraw their manuscript at any time before acceptance.
Initial Screening
All manuscripts are acknowledged upon submission within the TRACE portal.
The Editorial Operations Manager conducts an administrative and formatting check to ensure the submission is complete, anonymized for peer review, and compliant with JOHS’s scope, policies, and submission requirements. Manuscripts that are clearly out of scope, incomplete, or improperly prepared may be returned to authors for correction or declined at this stage.
Submissions that pass this administrative review are then evaluated by an associate editor, selected by the Editorial Operations Manager based on subject expertise and workload balance. Before accepting an assignment, the associate editor confirms that the manuscript aligns with their area of expertise and that no potential conflicts of interest exist. Once accepted, the associate editor assesses the manuscript for relevance, significance, and scientific suitability before initiating external peer review.
Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members are screened directly by the Editor-in-Chief and, if deemed appropriate, sent for external review with the author-board member excluded from all editorial decision-making for that manuscript.
Peer Review Assignment
Manuscripts deemed suitable are managed by the associate editor, who selects two independent peer reviewers based on subject expertise, familiarity with the topic or population, and ability to provide timely, constructive feedback. The Editorial Operations Manager may assist with reviewer identification and tracking. The journal draws on a curated reviewer database within TRACE, associate editor recommendations, and author recommendations to promote diverse and qualified perspectives. All reviewers are screened for potential conflicts of interest and are expected to decline invitations if any professional, financial, or personal relationships could affect their objectivity.
JOHS follows a double-blind review process, in which authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. Reviewers conduct an independent review and communicate recommendations with the assigned associate editor. The identities of the reviewer and associate editor are known to each other; these identities are not shared with the author(s). No information about the review process or editorial decision process is published. For full details on reviewer selection, review policies, and decision-making, see our Publication Ethics Statement.
Peer Review Reports
Reviewers provide a detailed report to the editors and recommend one of the following outcomes:
- Accept the paper
- Accept after minor modifications
- Reconsider after major revisions
- Reject the paper
Revisions
The Editorial Operations Manager conveys anonymized reviewer comments to the corresponding author, who submits a point-by-point response and a revised manuscript if revisions are requested.
The associate editor reviews the revision, and additional review rounds may be conducted until reviewers and editors are satisfied.
Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on the associate editor’s recommendation and reviewer feedback.
Manuscripts accepted for publication are copyedited for grammar, punctuation, and style by the Editorial Operations Manager.
The corresponding author receives page proofs and must return corrections within three business days; late corrections may not be incorporated.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewer identities remain confidential and are not disclosed in published papers, consistent with JOHS’s double-blind review policy. This confidentiality applies equally to associate editors and other editorial staff involved in the process. JOHS does not publicly list reviewer names in connection with specific manuscripts. Upon request and with the reviewer’s consent, JOHS can issue a formal verification letter or certificate confirming completion of peer review.
Ethical Concerns
Ethical concerns (eg, plagiarism, authorship disputes, AI misuse) should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief at johs@utk.edu.
Sending a Revised Manuscript
The revised version of the manuscript should be submitted online in a manner similar to that used for initial submission. However, there is no need to submit the “Cover Letter” file while submitting a revised version.
When submitting a revised manuscript, contributors are requested to include the referees' remarks along with point-by-point clarification at the beginning in the revised file itself. In addition, contributors should mark the changes using underlining or colored text in the article.
Process for Appeals
Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe it was made in error. Appeals must be submitted in writing within 30 days of the decision, with a detailed rationale sent to the editorial office (johs@utk.edu). Appeals will be processed within 6–8 weeks and reviewed in accordance with COPE guidelines. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on all appeals, and this decision is binding. Second appeals are not considered.
