Wellcome to National Portal
Text size A A A
Color C C C C

সর্ব-শেষ হাল-নাগাদ: ২৮ মার্চ ২০২৪

লেখকদের জন্য

Writing Instructions for Authors

Effective date: 29th March, 2024


1.0 Criteria for Publication

  1. Appropriateness. The National Bulletin of Public Health (NBPH) publishes information on research activities, disease outbreak investigations, public health surveillance activities, and interventions undertaken in detecting, preventing, and responding to public health events in the country. The information is relevant to district, national, and global stakeholders including the public health community, policy makers, clinicians, researchers, academia, traditional and social media and general people.
  2. Originality. Articles should be original but can be from previously published information or guidelines/recommendations in special circumstances.  Original sources should be cited.
  3. Quality. Articles should be based on analyses using accepted scientific methods and should include sufficient data to adequately address the public health topic.
  4. Timeliness. Articles should contain the most current data from surveys, surveillance systems, or studies. Articles on investigations in progress or completed recently have the highest priority for publication. Note: Data from outbreaks should be as recent as possible at the time of submission, surveillance data should not be older than one years, and other data should not be older than three years.
  5. Clarity: Articles should adhere to principles of plain language (Home | plainlanguage.gov), including succinctness, logical organization with the reader in mind, language appropriate for local and international audiences, and minimal use of acronyms/initialisms and scientific terms/jargons.

2.0 Authorship

NBPH articles may be authored by government and/or non-governmental staff members (e.g., staff representing non-governmental organizations or academia). Articles may not be authored by artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies

  1. Attribution. The NBPH attribution policy follows the guidance provided by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (https://www.cdc.gov/maso/policy/authorship.pdf) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the- role-of-authors-and-contributors.html).
  2. Credit.  The authorship should be based on the following 4 criteria:
    1. Substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
    2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
    3. Final approval of the version to be published.
    4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Note: Chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT) should not be listed as authors because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality, which are requirements for authorship.

  1. Authorship order. The order of authorship should be a joint decision of the coauthors. Authorship order, including choice of first author, should be based on the level of contribution to the article and the work underlying it. The first author will have responsibility for the integrity of the work from inception to publication. First authors also are responsible for providing leadership in determining order of the other coauthors, establishing writing assignments, providing direction for reviews and revisions, and compiling drafts. The first author should ensure an open forum for coauthors to share their concerns and suggestions and should ensure that all ethical considerations (e.g., Institutional Review Board review, disclosure of conflicts of interest) have been addressed.


Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. The acknowledgement can be individual or together as a group under a single heading (e.g. "Clinical Investigators" or "Participating Investigators"), and their contributions should be specified (e.g., "served as scientific advisors," "critically reviewed the study proposal," "collected data," "provided and cared for study patients," "participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript"). The corresponding author should ensure that all named individuals have consented to being listed under acknowledgements.

Use of AI for writing assistance should be reported in the acknowledgment section.

3.0 Types of Articles

The following types of articles are published in the NBPH: a) full report of an investigation or study, b) outbreak investigation articles, c) surveillance summary reports, d) policy briefs, e) notices to readers

Articles on recent public health concerns published elsewhere or under consideration could be of general interest of NBPH readers.

3.1 Full Article

A Full Report is an article of a completed investigation or study that answers a question of public health importance. Ideally, the answer should be one that can guide future public health practice. Contributors should check previously published NBPH Full Reports that are similar to their submission to determine the optimal format and structure. Full Reports should be no longer than 1,500 words, should follow IMRAD format and include no more than ten references and a total of no more than three tables, figures, and/or boxes. Full Reports exceeding these limits might be considered if, in the opinion of the editor of the NBPH, the exception is justified. (Tips: A hallmark of NBPH articles is simplicity. These Full Reports are intended to only summarize the analysis and recommendations, not to provide every detail. The strict 10-reference rule is intended to limit the scope of the article. A good test for simplicity is whether, in a sentence or two, you can tell a casual reader what the article is about and what should be done.)

  1. Introductory paragraph. The first paragraph of a Full Report is similar to both a newspaper lead paragraph (i.e., who, what, when, where, why, and how?) and the abstract of an article in a typical medical journal and is limited to 150–200 words. The introductory paragraph should contain the following components: 1) background (what is the problem? why is this worth writing about?), 2) method of analysis (who did what, using what data, and why?), 3) key findings (summarize 1 or 2 main results and any actions that resulted), and 4) public health message (what should be done by public health practitioners or, if relevant, by clinicians or the public).
  2. Additional background (if needed). Each Full Report should be understandable by an informed medical or public health professional without special knowledge of the subject. If all essential background information will not fit in the Introductory paragraph, that background should be placed in a second introductory paragraph, before Methods.
  3. Methods. For most Full Reports, the second section should be a concise summary (1 or 2 paragraphs) of the methods used to conduct the analysis. Important components of this section might include the sources of data, a statement of how the data were collected, case definitions or participant selection criteria, the period of study, types of specimens taken, tests performed (e.g., serology, culture, or toxicology), and statistical methods used. For statistical software, provide the version and manufacturer in parentheses after the software name, as shown in the following example: “SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute)” was used to conduct all analyses.
  4. Results. The results section is a concise highlighting of the major results of the analysis. Examples might include elements of the descriptive (i.e., time, place, person) and epidemiologic results, disease trends and rates, treatments, and outcomes. Minor results from tables or figures should not be highlighted in results. Case reports and series should include details on exposure, signs and symptoms, initial diagnosis, laboratory and radiologic findings, treatment, clinical course, and outcome. Generally, data highlighted in the text also are presented in a table or figure.
  5. Actions taken. When appropriate, 1 or 2 sentences describing any control measures implemented.
  6. Discussion. The Discussion should begin by stating the conclusions of the report, interpreting the results, conveying their public health meaning, and placing the results into context by citing comparative or corroborative studies. All Full Reports should include a Limitations paragraph, typically placed near the end of the Discussion. The Discussion should conclude by stating the implications of the findings to public health practice and any recommendations for prevention and control. When appropriate, specific examples of successful public health interventions should be included. A common fault is the inclusion of recommendations that, although sound, do not follow from the analysis presented in the articles.
  7. Acknowledgments. May be used to recognize the work of persons involved in the project but who do not meet NBPH authorship criteria. The corresponding author should ensure that all named individuals have consented to being listed under Acknowledgments.
  8. References. Must be limited to ten.
  9. Summary box. In 1 or 2 sentences for each, authors should answer the following: What is already known on this topic? What is added by this report? and What are the implications for public health practice?  These answers contain the key public health message, as well as the justification for the publication. Total word limit should be no more than 75‒100 words. Answers longer than 100 words will be edited to meet the word limit.

3.2 Outbreak Investigation Articles

Outbreak investigation articles should generally follow the format of Full Reports, with some elements specific to outbreak investigation articles. (Tip: As much as possible, an outbreak investigation article should read like a chronologic narrative; it should tell the story.)

  1. Summary paragraph. Generally, the introductory paragraph should begin with 1 to 3 sentences establishing the existence of the outbreak or underlying public health problem (e.g., on 17th July 2022, from Lalpur, Natore reported to the MoH 5 suspected cases of cutaneous anthrax from two neighbouring villages. The introductory paragraph also usually contains: 1) a statement that an investigation was conducted [including the investigation objectives], when and by whom; 2) the most important methods; 3) the most important finding(s); 4) the actions taken to control the outbreak; and 5) a statement of the public health implications and actions that should be taken in response to the investigation.
  2. Background. Same as for Full Reports with details on the alert (how you got to know about the outbreak). First, present the initial investigation and its findings, which might include: 1) a description of the setting and a statement of how the outbreak came to the         attention of health authorities; 2) a clinical description of the index case or initial cases; 3) initial key test results; and 4) the investigation objectives.                                                                                                                                                                                                
  3. Methods. Summarize the full investigation, including case definition, case-finding activities including laboratory investigations, descriptive epidemiology, environmental,  trace forward and trace back investigations, hypothesis generation activities, and analytical epidemiologic study. Ethical considerations including Institutional review board approvals, informed assent, and consent among others are to be included.
  4. Results. Cases should be counted and described by clinical characteristics, treatment and outcome, as well as time, place, and person descriptive results. Next, present the results of any environmental, trace forward, and trace back investigations, hypothesis generation activities, analytic epidemiologic studies (e.g., cohort or case-control studies). Additionally, provide the results of relevant laboratory investigations e.g., microbiologic, genetic, or toxicologic results.
  5. Discussion. Same as for a Full Report plus when appropriate, a brief description summarizing any public health interventions taken and the results of the interventions follows.
  6. Acknowledgments. Same as for Full Report
  7. References. Same as for Full Report.

3.3 Surveillance Summary Reports

Surveillance reports synthesize surveillance data into useful information that documents the public health impact of notifiable or other priority diseases and conditions. 

Abstract or Summary

The abstract or summary is designed to provide the reader with the key points of the full report. Although it comes around first in the report, you should write it last after the main report is complete. It is designed to allow the reader to decide whether or not more reading is necessary. An abstract for a surveillance report should be about 230 words in Bengali or 200 if in English, and it should have the following points:

  • What is the disease or condition under surveillance?
  • Why is it under surveillance?
  • What are the principal patterns seen in the data? The focus should be on patterns that are relevant to public health?


This introductory statement should outline in a text box or series of bullets why this disease is important, emphasizing why it is under surveillance. One should provide background statistics that cover the following as applicable to the disease:

  • Burden of disease (e.g. incidence or prevalence)
  • Mortality (e.g. case fatality rate) and severity
  • Potential to create outbreaks or epidemics
  • Potential threat (emerging or re-emerging infection, bio-terrorism, expanding range and affect from global warming, etc.)
  • Social and economic impact
  • International program or importance – is it a WHO program, is it of interest to close neighbors?
  • Health gain opportunity: opportunity to reduce the present and future burden of ill health through prevention or control
  • Public perception of danger or importance


Summarize how data were collected and analyzed. This section should include: 1) the case definition, 2) other data collected during investigation, 3) description of the reporting tree or network, 4) denominator data, and 5) methods used to summarize the data.


Write a short (1-3 sentence) text that points out the main patterns observed in the data. Graphs and maps should have captions (not titles) which look for:

  • Special characteristics of the disease or condition (e.g. death, severity, different strains of the agent, antibiotic susceptibility)
  • Trends in time
  • Seasonality
  • Outbreaks or epidemics
  • Clusters
  • Geographic distribution of rates and cases
  • Important features of the distribution by age, sex & other personal characteristics
  • Frequency of risk factors (if provided in the data)


The Results section should address the following areas:

  • Total number of cases and rates
    • If the disease has more than one clinical presentation, then give numbers and rates in each category. Include case fatality rates.
  • Distribution in time
  • Distribution by place
  • Distribution by person (e.g. age, sex, nationality, etc.)
  • Distribution by known risk factors collected through the surveillance system
  • Any unusual features of the data
  • Potential or known artifacts and biases

Discussion, conclusion and recommendations

This section should be written so that the reader knows what you have found. The Discussion should begin by stating the conclusions of the report.  Other elements to include are: 1) the implications of the results and their potential use to inform public health practice, 2) the relationship of the findings to other studies 3) the limitations of the results, 4) suggested improvements to the surveillance system, and recommended public health actions.

The Recommendations section should include the following:

  • Recommendations about the disease or condition
  • Recommendations about control and prevention
  • Recommendations about surveillance

Evaluative discussion

This section can discuss:

  • The implications of the results and their potential use,
  • The relationship of the findings to other studies,
  • The limitations of the results
  • Suggested improvements of the surveillance system.
  • Any other points of public health interest


Same as for Full Report


Same as for Full Report.

3.4 Policy Briefs

Policy Briefs are intended to announce new official policies or recommendations from Ministry of Health. The maximum word count at submission is 1000 words. Up to three tables, figures, or boxes may be included. Contributors should check published NBPH articles that are similar to their submissions, then determine the optimal format and structure for their articles. Policy Briefs can vary considerably. The following is a rough guide.

  1. Introductory paragraph. The introductory paragraph should be limited to 150–200 words. It might contain all or some of the following components: a brief introductory statement orienting the reader to the topic and placing it in context, a brief description of the public health problem, a brief statement of the rationale for the policy or recommendation, mention of the most important parts of the policy or recommendations, and one or two sentences stating the conclusions and the public health implications of the new policy or recommendations.
  2. Background. The Policy Brief should include a paragraph after the introduction that summarizes background information relevant to the policy or recommendation that can help the reader understand the context and need for the policy or recommendation.
  3. Methods. Should include a summary of the methods used to establish the policy or recommendation, including answers to some or all of these questions: Who was involved in the production of the guidelines or recommendations, and how? What evidence base was considered? What was the rationale for considering this evidence base? Was other evidence excluded from consideration and, if so, why?
  4. Rationale and evidence. The Policy Brief should provide a concise review of the rationale for the policy or recommendation and a descriptive review of the scientific evidence used to establish it. It should include an explanation of how the policy or recommendation adds to or differs from relevant policies or recommendations established previously.
  5. Presentation of the policy or recommendation. The policy or recommendation should state clearly when it takes effect and to whom and under what circumstances it applies.
  6. Discussion or comment. The Policy Brief should comment on the likely impact of the new policy or recommendation and plans for assessment of the policy or recommendation.
  7. References. Same as for Full Report.

3.5 Notes from the Field

Notes from the Field are abbreviated reports intended to inform readers of ongoing or recent events of concern to the public health community, without waiting for development of a Full Report. Events of concern include epidemics/outbreaks, unusual disease clusters, poisonings, exposures to disease or disease agents (including environmental and toxic), and notable public health-related case reports.

These reports may contain early unconfirmed information, preliminary results, hypotheses regarding risk factors and exposures, and other similarly incomplete information. No definitive conclusions need be presented in Notes from the Field.

  1. Format: The ideal length of the text is 500 words. Longer submission might be accepted with proper justification. Notes from the Field should contain a brief introduction describing the onset of the event and when and how it came to light, followed by descriptions of the investigation, magnitude, and extent of the event (e.g., number of known cases or geographical occurrence), outcomes (e.g., hospitalizations or deaths), and any preliminary conclusions and actions that were, are being, or should be taken based on the findings in the report.
  2. Tables and figures: One table, one figure, or one box will be considered, especially if its inclusion shortens the text.
  3. References: References should be kept to an absolute minimum.
  4. Criteria for authors: Because these reports are abbreviated, attribution should be strictly limited to those persons or organizations responsible for writing the report or to whom public inquiries should be directed.

3.6 Notices to Readers

Notices to Readers are used generally to inform readers about changes in NBPH articles content and policies.

4.0Author Submission Checklist and Submission Formats

4.1 Report Text

Format text

Style: No Spacing, Single column, Single Spacing

Font: Single Spacing, Times New Roman - size 12

Titles: Capitals and bold, size 14

Pages should be numbered. Report components in the primary MS Word file should be in this order (not all components are required for every report):

  • Report title
  • List of authors
  • Report text
  • Acknowledgements
  • Corresponding author
  • Author affiliations
  • References
  • Footnotes
  • Summary box

Maximum length of reports varies by report type; refer to the appropriate section of the instructions. Word count does not include title, author information, footnotes, references, acknowledgments, or summary box.

4.2 Report Title

The title should be succinct and relevant to the article. Title includes topic followed by a dash (—) offset by spaces, data source (if used), location, and timeframe (date range should include an en dash (–) between beginning and ending dates with no space preceding or following the en dash. For example:

“Evaluation of an Intervention to Prevent Zoonotic Spillover from Bats - Bangladesh, 2013-2023.”

Should not refer to direction or comparison (e.g., “Trends in …” or “Larger…”).

4.3 Authors, Affiliations, and Corresponding Author

  • List of authors follows the title. Use first and last names and middle initials (optional), followed by the author’s degree or degrees (at authors’ discretion, degrees can be omitted).
  • Only report degrees equivalent to master’s and above (i.e., do not include bachelor’s level or below or professional certifications), and only the highest-level degrees should be used (e.g., if author has both a master’s and a PhD, report only the latter). Multiple degrees of equal rank can be listed (e.g., MD, PhD, and DVM; MS and MPH, etc.). At authors’ discretion, degrees can be omitted.
  • Use a superscripted numeral after each author’s degree or degrees for author affiliations provided at the end of the report. Do not combine multiple affiliations for an author under one number; each affiliation should be reported separately.
  • Provide the corresponding author’s contact information (name [as appears in author list] and e-mail address) below the author affiliations section.
  • If there is a group author on the byline, the group title and list of members may be included immediately after the text of the report and any general acknowledgements. Provide author names (no degrees) and short affiliations (organization or location).

See examples below for preferred order and format:

  • Report Title
  • List of authors:

Sharon Saydah, PhD1; Robert B. Gerzoff, MS1; Christopher A. Taylor, PhD2; Joshua R. Ehrlich, MD3; Jinan Saaddine, MD, PhD1

1Division of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC; 2Division of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC; 3Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

4.4 Acknowledgments

List non-author contributors as “Person 1, Person 2, Affiliation 1; Person 3, Affiliation 2”; etc.

  • Do not include degrees.
  • Group together persons who are affiliated with the same CDC division or external entity and separate their names using commas; names are listed alphabetically unless the authors prefer otherwise.
  • Separate affiliations or group acknowledgments using semicolons.
  • Affiliations do not include city and state.

An example is provided below:

All community members and service providers who participated in qualitative interviews; Sergio Caraballo, Sofia Mendez, Buena Gente Community Fund; Joshua Johnson, Green County Board of Health; Tegan Boehmer, Rachel Kaufmann, CDC; Elizabeth Smart, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine.

4.5 References

In text, number the references in order of appearance. Place reference number callouts in parentheses inside of any punctuation. Italicize the material within the parentheses only; do not italicize the parentheses themselves. Do not include a space after the comma when listing multiple reference numbers. For example: (1), (2,3), (1–3). The font size should be 9.

In the References section at the end of the report, list references in numeric order. Follow the style of ICJME Recommendations (formerly Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts), available at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html. Preprints should be cited as references.


Example of a reference of standard journal article:

Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002 Jul 25;347(4):284-7.


4.6 Footnotes

  • Use the following footnote symbols in order of appearance: *, §, **, ††§§¶¶, etc. All symbols are superscripted except *. Footnote symbols should be placed outside of any punctuation except semicolons and colons. For example: “The study identified one patient with condition X,** and two patients with condition Y.††
  • Each footnote should be ≤80 words; the maximum length of all footnotes combined is 700 words.
  • Each footnote callout may only be used once in the body of the report.
  • Endnotes function of MS Word should not be used to create footnotes.

4.7 Summary Box

The Summary Box contains the key public health message, as well as the justification for the publication. It is a shorter version of and must only contain information provided in the Abstract. Essentially, it is an abstract of the abstract. It may be written in plainer language because it might be used in social media.

Summary Questions and Answers

The summary box provides brief answers (one or two short sentences each) to the three questions below. The maximum length is 121 words total, including the three question headings.

  • What is already known about this topic? (align with background in Abstract)
  • What is added by this report? (align with results in Abstract)
  • What are the implications for public health practice? (align with public health message in Abstract and conclusion of report)


4.8 Tables, Figures, and Boxes

Tables should supplement, not duplicate the text. They should be called out within the text and numbered in the order of their citation in the text. The tables, figures, and boxes should be self-explanatory and follow the norms and patterns of standard peer reviewed journals, bulletins etc. like MMWR, CDC authors’ guideline.

4.8.1 Tables

  • Create tables in MS Word or Excel.
  • Submit each table as a separate file; do not embed tables in the report text file.
  • Table titles should be descriptive and complete, including the who, what, where, and when of the data being presented, so that a reader can understand what the data represent without reading the text.
  • For tables listing epidemiologic data by geographic entity (e.g., region, division, state, locality, or city) or other categories such as race and ethnicity, data of the table can be sorted alphabetically unless there is a clear low-to-high or high-to-low pattern.
  • Tabs should not be used to create table columns or entries, and individual entries should appear in their own individual cells rather than separated by hard returns.
  • Every vertical column should have a heading, consisting of a title with the unit of measure in parentheses. Units should not change within a column.
  • Cells cannot be empty. To address, cells can be merged (e.g., works well for row and column headings), can include an em-dash as a placeholder for a numeric value, or can include indication that value was not calculated.
  • Cells cannot contain hard returns, tabs, or extra spaces.
  • Confidence intervals should be reported as a range within parentheses (e.g., (200–400)). Do not report as a numeral followed by a ± symbol (e.g., 300±100). Numbers and related percentages or confidence intervals should be placed in the same cell, not in separate columns.
  • Footnote symbols should be placed sequentially in the table, beginning with the title and then moving from left to right, row by row in the table. Use the following footnote symbols in order of appearance: *, §, **, ††§§¶¶, etc. All the symbols are superscripted except * symbol.
  • Footnote callouts may be used more than once in a table.
  • Table footnotes do not count against the footnote limits for the text of the report.

Format tables

Times New Roman, Font size 9 No vertical lines. Horizontal lines in the table can be removed

No table should be larger than a single A4 page.

Footnote should be size 9 and italic.


4.8.2 Figures

Submit each figure as a separate file; do not embed figures in the report text file.

Figure titles should be descriptive and complete, including the who, what, where, and when of the data being presented, so that a reader can understand what the data represent without reading the text.

 Types of Figures

  • Diagrams and medical illustrations
  • Charts and graphs
  • Maps
  • Photographic images

Figure Instructions

  • All figures except photos should be created and submitted in vector format files such as .ai, .eps, and .wmf.
  • Photos should be submitted as high-resolution rather image format files such as .tif or .jpg.
  • Do not submit a figure with more than four panels. Panels in multipanel figures should be related to each other.
  • Place key or legend within figure whenever possible.
  • Footnote symbols should be placed in the title, not within the figure. Use the following footnote symbols in order of appearance: *, §, **, ††§§¶¶, etc. The * symbol is not superscripted; all other symbols are superscripted.
  • Figure footnotes do not count against the footnote limits for the text of the report.

Charts, Graphics, and Maps

  • Files created by vector programs are best for accurately plotting and maintaining data points. Most statistical software programs allow users to save or export files in digital vector formats.
  • Acceptable file formats are Adobe Illustrator (.ai), .eps, PowerPoint (.ppt), Excel (.xls), .wmf, Word (.docx editable not pasted into), .svg, and .pdf.
  • Bar and line graphs should have linked, underlying data tables.
  • Do not use pie charts or 3D graphs.

Photographic images

  • Images created digitally (by digital camera or electronically created illustrations) must meet the minimum resolution requirements (≥300 ppi) at the time of creation. Electronically increasing the resolution of an image after creation causes a breakdown of detail and will result in an unacceptable poor-quality image.
  1. Each component of a composite image must be uploaded separately at submission and individually meet the minimum resolution requirement.
  2. Color photographs should be submitted in RGB mode using profiles such as Adobe RGB or sRGB. Digital cameras capture images in RGB. Do not change any color settings once the file is on the computer.
  3. Black-and-white photographs (e.g., radiographs, ultrasound images, CT and MRI scans, and electron micrographs) may be submitted in either RGB or grayscale modes.
  4. Acceptable file formats are Photoshop .psd or .tif, and .jpg.

4.8.3 Boxes

Nonquantitative information unsuitable for tables or figures can be submitted as boxed text (typically a bulleted list). During review and production, editors will make a final determination on the format of the information.

5.0 Clearance Policy

The NBPH publishes only articles that have been cleared according to the [IEDCR] clearance policies. The NBPH clearance policy applies to articles submitted by both [IEDCR] authors and those from outside the agency. Before submitting articles to the NBPH for publication, contributors should ensure that articles have received clearance from the following:

  1. All entities that are required to clear the article in accordance with the current [IEDCR] Clearance Policy.
  2. District, regional and national health departments/programs involved in the investigation or analysis.
  3. Other agencies named in the article or that have a programmatic or regulatory interest in matters mentioned in the article.  Private-sector organizations, international health agencies and other organizations and ministries at which any named contributor is employed, according to the clearance policies for that organization, agency, or ministry.

6.0 Submission, Acceptance, and Scheduling

Unless the editorial team has agreed to expedite publication, cleared articles will be published according to the routine publication schedule. (NOTE: If requesting expedited publication, the department head from which the article originates must submit a request to the nbph@iedcr.gov.bd . The request must include the rationale for expedited publication. All articles must be accepted for publication by the Managing Editor. The NBPH determines acceptance for publication after reviewing the final, cleared report.

7.0 Guidance for Correcting Errors

Corrections of errors preserve the integrity of the scientific and public health literature. They also protect the reputations of authors and the NBPH, by demonstrating the commitment to ensuring accurate science.  Requests to publish corrections should be sent to the Managing Editor. An Erratum will be published as soon as possible following notification about the error.

If pervasive errors are brought to the attention of authors or editors, it’s our obligation to transparently correct the literature. After reviewing the nature and source of the errors for each case, the NBPH editors will assess the article. In cases with suspected scientific misconduct, the editors will determine the appropriate corrective action. In cases of inadvertent, pervasive errors, the Editor-in-Chief will determine the appropriate method for correcting the article based on current scientific publication guidance.

Below are the most likely paths for correcting inadvertent, pervasive errors.

  1. For articles that have pervasive errors, but the corrections do not change the conclusions or interpretation of the article, the NBPH editors will correct the literature through the mechanism of “Correct and Republish.”
  2. For articles that have pervasive errors that change the interpretation or the conclusions when corrected, the NBPH editors will correct the literature through the mechanism of “Retraction.” In collaboration with authors, the NBPH editors will determine whether it is appropriate to also republish the article at the time of retraction. The NBPH will follow the National Library of Medicine guidance to ensure transparency and clarity for readers.

NOTE: If pervasive errors have been identified, contact the nbph@iedcr.gov.bd as soon as possible.

8.0 Author fees and revenue sources

The NBPH is a public health bulletin of the Government of Bangladesh. It is organized and published by IEDCR with a grant from of Bloomberg Philanthropies Data for Health Initiative and technical support from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the CDC Foundation. It does not require subscriptions, advertise, charge publication fees or charge for reprints.

9.0 Copyright and licensing

All materials in the NBPH is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission; citation as to source; however, is appreciated. Any article can be reprinted or published. If cited as a reprint, it should be referenced in the original form.