2006 South African Health Review Peer-Reviewers’ Guidelines

Background

Broad Philosophical Approach

The philosophy underpinning the South African Health Review is to provide a reflection on progress in the transformation of the health system in providing improved care to the poor and the most vulnerable sections of South African society, as well as promoting equity in South Africa . An important component of the Review is to reflect on the successes and challenges of the DoH. The Review also provides a historical record of the developments and data in relation to the South African Health System.

All chapters where relevant should seek to build upon findings of earlier SAHRs, present findings and reflect progress or lack of it in relation to chapters in earlier Reviews.

Aims of the South African Health Review:

• Monitor of trends within health and the health system and of progress in transformation and the move to equity
• Comprehensive and independent review of developments in health sector over preceding twelve months
• Identifying hindrances to policy implementation
• Highlight possible policy implications of the research findings

Target Audience

Primary audience include: Health service managers, policy makers and public health specialists.

Secondary audience include: media, parliamentarians, councillors, academics (lecturers and students) health related local and international institutions and organisations .

2006 SAHR Theme

The theme for the 2006 SAHR is Maternal, Child and Women's health.

Peer-reviewing

The purpose of peer- reviewing is to provide a critique that is: collegial, constructive critical, objective and balanced. When specific criticisms are made, the reviewer should indicate precisely what the problems are and how they may be overcome. The comments made should take into account the purpose of the SAHR and its readership outlined above.

Guiding Principles for Peer-reviewing

If the reviewer challenges a point made by the authors, he/she should provide specific justification for his/her disagreement (e.g., literature citations).

The reviewer should maintain confidentiality about the existence and content of the manuscript unless HST, through the SAHR Editors has authorised the use of the manuscript before publication .

The reviewer must not copy / use materials from the manuscript to advance his/her own work before the manuscript is published .

Reviewing is both a privilege and responsibility. It takes time to prepare a useful, critical review. The most important reward for you as a reviewer is your contribution to the quality of published chapter and this must be protected by the reviewer.

Keywords	This Item is associated with the Following Keywords: .
You Can Comment on this Item, or View other people's Comments
Easy Print Email to a friend