Revenue and Funding Model

The Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances is committed to maintaining financial transparency, editorial independence, and equitable access to scholarly publishing. The journal operates under an open-access publishing model and currently does not charge authors for manuscript submission, editorial processing, peer review, article processing, page production, color reproduction, or withdrawal. The journal's published APC policy currently lists all such author-facing charges as USD 0.

The journal's financial arrangements are structured so that editorial decisions remain independent of revenue considerations. Acceptance, rejection, revision, peer-review assignment, and other editorial decisions are based on scholarly and ethical criteria rather than the financial circumstances of authors or the potential commercial value of individual manuscripts.

1. Purpose of This Policy

The purpose of this policy is to provide authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, and other stakeholders with clear information regarding the journal's financial model and the relationship between funding and editorial decision-making.

Financial transparency is important because revenue arrangements should not create undisclosed incentives capable of influencing scholarly assessment, publication decisions, peer review, research-integrity procedures, or the correction of the published record.

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances therefore seeks to maintain a clear separation between financial administration and editorial judgment.

2. Current Publishing Model

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances operates as an open-access journal.

Published scholarly content is made available online in accordance with the journal's applicable open-access and licensing policies.

The journal currently follows a no-author-fee publication model. Authors are not required to make a financial payment as a condition of:

  • manuscript submission;

  • initial editorial assessment;

  • peer review;

  • revision;

  • acceptance;

  • article processing;

  • page production;

  • color reproduction; or

  • manuscript withdrawal.

The absence of author-facing fees applies independently of an author's country, institution, academic position, professional status, or research funding.

3. Article Processing Charges

The journal currently charges an Article Processing Charge of USD 0.

No APC is required for publication.

Authors should not be asked to make an unofficial or undisclosed payment to secure:

  • accelerated review;

  • favorable peer-review recommendations;

  • manuscript acceptance;

  • editorial consideration;

  • publication priority; or

  • any other editorial advantage.

Any request for an unauthorized payment associated with the journal should be reported to the publisher or editorial office.

4. Submission and Editorial Processing Fees

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances does not currently charge a manuscript submission fee or editorial-processing fee.

The payment status of an author must not determine whether a manuscript proceeds to editorial screening or peer review.

Initial editorial decisions should be based on factors such as:

  • relevance to the journal's aims and scope;

  • scholarly contribution;

  • originality;

  • methodological appropriateness;

  • research integrity;

  • ethical compliance; and

  • overall suitability for scholarly evaluation.

5. Publisher Support

The journal is published by GalaxiaUniverse, which provides the publishing and technical framework through which the journal operates.

The journal's current publishing model does not depend on author-paid APC revenue. Operational and publishing activities are supported through the publisher's available resources and publishing infrastructure.

Publisher involvement in administrative, technical, production, or financial matters does not confer authority to determine the scholarly outcome of individual manuscripts for commercial reasons.

6. Sources of Revenue

The journal does not currently rely on mandatory author-facing publication charges as a revenue source.

Where the journal receives financial or in-kind support from legitimate sources in the future, such support may include, where applicable:

  • publisher support;

  • institutional support;

  • grants;

  • research or scholarly-communication support;

  • infrastructure support;

  • sponsorship;

  • technology or hosting support; or

  • other lawful sources consistent with editorial independence.

The existence of such support must not create a right for a funder, sponsor, advertiser, or supporting organization to influence manuscript selection, reviewer appointments, editorial decisions, research-integrity investigations, or published conclusions.

Material funding relationships should be disclosed where their disclosure is relevant to transparency.

7. No Pay-to-Publish Decision Model

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances does not operate a system in which payment determines manuscript acceptance.

Publication decisions must not be based on:

  • an author's ability to pay;

  • institutional wealth;

  • availability of research funding;

  • nationality;

  • geographic location;

  • commercial value of a topic;

  • likelihood of attracting sponsorship; or

  • potential advertising relationships.

A manuscript should be accepted only when the responsible editorial process determines that it is appropriate for publication.

8. Editorial Independence

Editorial independence is fundamental to the journal's financial model.

The Editor-in-Chief and authorized editors are responsible for scholarly editorial decisions.

Financial, commercial, administrative, advertising, or sponsorship considerations must not improperly influence decisions concerning:

  • reviewer selection;

  • acceptance;

  • rejection;

  • revision;

  • manuscript prioritization;

  • publication timing;

  • correction;

  • expression of concern;

  • retraction; or

  • investigation of research misconduct.

The publisher may provide administrative and operational support but should not require editors to accept or reject manuscripts for commercial reasons.

9. Separation of Editorial and Financial Functions

Where practicable, financial administration should remain distinct from the scholarly evaluation of manuscripts.

Reviewers should not be informed of an author's financial circumstances when those circumstances are irrelevant to peer review.

Editors should not be encouraged to accept manuscripts for the purpose of generating revenue.

Similarly, financial considerations should not prevent the journal from rejecting a manuscript that fails to meet scholarly or ethical requirements.

10. Funding of Published Research

The financial model of the journal is distinct from the funding of individual research articles.

Authors are expected to disclose the sources of financial support for their own research, where applicable.

A manuscript should include an appropriate funding statement identifying:

  • funding organization;

  • grant or project number where applicable; and

  • the role of the funder where relevant.

If no external funding supported the research, authors may state this explicitly.

11. Role of Research Funders

Where research has received external financial support, authors should disclose whether the funder had any role in:

  • study design;

  • participant recruitment;

  • data collection;

  • data analysis;

  • interpretation of findings;

  • manuscript preparation;

  • decision to submit;

  • technology development; or

  • publication planning.

Financial sponsorship does not necessarily invalidate research, but the relationship should be reported transparently where it may be relevant to interpretation.

12. Commercial Funding and Digital Health Research

Digital health and telemonitoring research may involve commercial technology developers, healthcare companies, medical-device manufacturers, software developers, artificial intelligence providers, wearable-device manufacturers, pharmaceutical organizations, or healthcare service companies.

Where such organizations provide funding, equipment, software, datasets, devices, technical services, or other material support, authors should disclose the relationship appropriately.

The manuscript should make clear where a commercial organization participated in:

  • development of the technology;

  • study design;

  • data ownership;

  • data analysis;

  • statistical interpretation;

  • preparation of the manuscript; or

  • decisions concerning publication.

Commercial involvement should not be concealed.

13. Sponsored Research

Research sponsorship must not be confused with sponsorship of the journal itself.

Where an article reports sponsored research, the authors remain responsible for ensuring that the funding relationship is disclosed accurately.

Sponsors should not be permitted to suppress unfavorable findings, require misleading presentation of results, or prevent authors from reporting legitimate research limitations.

Editors may request clarification concerning the role of a sponsor where it is necessary to evaluate research independence or competing interests.

14. Institutional Support

Authors may conduct research using institutional funding, facilities, personnel, equipment, data systems, clinical infrastructure, or other organizational resources.

Such support should be disclosed where required by the funding arrangements or where it is materially relevant to understanding the research.

Institutional affiliation alone does not constitute a conflict of interest.

15. Grants and External Funding

Where the journal itself receives a grant or external funding contribution for publishing infrastructure, editorial development, technological improvement, accessibility, training, or another legitimate publishing activity, the support should not give the funder control over individual editorial decisions.

Any material external financial support for journal operations should be disclosed transparently where appropriate.

The journal should not describe itself as financially supported by a particular organization unless such support actually exists and can be substantiated.

16. Sponsorship of Journal Activities

The journal may consider legitimate sponsorship of specific non-editorial activities where such arrangements do not compromise editorial independence.

Potentially sponsorable activities may include:

  • academic events;

  • educational activities;

  • technical infrastructure;

  • scholarly communication initiatives; or

  • accessibility-related services.

Sponsorship should be clearly distinguishable from scholarly content.

Sponsors must not receive favorable editorial treatment in exchange for financial support.

17. Advertising Revenue

If advertising is accepted in the future, advertising arrangements must remain separate from editorial decision-making.

Advertisements must not influence:

  • which manuscripts are accepted;

  • how articles are reviewed;

  • editorial conclusions;

  • research-integrity investigations; or

  • the prominence given to particular scholarly findings.

Advertising arrangements should comply with the journal's Advertising Policy.

Advertisers should not receive access to confidential manuscripts, reviewer identities, or unpublished editorial information.

18. Commercial Influence

Financial relationships must not permit external organizations to exercise inappropriate influence over the scholarly record.

No sponsor, advertiser, technology provider, commercial partner, or funding organization should be permitted to:

  • select reviewers for unrelated manuscripts;

  • require manuscript acceptance;

  • suppress unfavorable findings;

  • prevent publication of legitimate criticism;

  • modify editorial decisions;

  • interfere with correction or retraction procedures; or

  • obtain confidential peer-review information.

19. Financial Conflicts of Interest

Editors, reviewers, and authors should disclose relevant financial interests in accordance with the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.

Relevant financial interests may include:

  • employment;

  • consultancy;

  • stock ownership;

  • honoraria;

  • paid advisory roles;

  • patent interests;

  • research grants;

  • commercial contracts;

  • licensing arrangements; or

  • other relationships that could reasonably affect impartiality.

Disclosure of a financial interest does not automatically prevent participation or publication. The journal should determine whether the interest can be appropriately managed.

20. Financial Interests of Editors

Editors should not manage manuscripts where a relevant financial relationship could reasonably compromise their impartiality.

Where such a conflict exists, editorial responsibility should be transferred to another qualified editor.

An editor must not accept a manuscript because publication could provide direct personal financial benefit.

21. Financial Interests of Reviewers

Reviewers should disclose financial relationships that could influence their assessment of a manuscript.

A reviewer should ordinarily decline an assignment where they have a significant financial interest in:

  • the technology being evaluated;

  • a competing technology;

  • the commercial organization involved;

  • intellectual property related to the research; or

  • the outcome of the study.

The editorial team should determine whether a disclosed relationship requires recusal.

22. Financial Interests of Authors

Authors should provide complete and accurate competing-interest disclosures.

Particular care is appropriate where research evaluates:

  • medical software;

  • telemonitoring platforms;

  • wearable devices;

  • digital therapeutics;

  • artificial intelligence products;

  • clinical decision-support systems;

  • diagnostic technologies; or

  • commercially developed healthcare systems.

Readers should be able to identify relevant financial relationships when interpreting the published findings.

23. Waivers and Discounts

Because the journal currently lists its article processing charge as USD 0, an APC waiver or discount mechanism is not presently required.

If author-facing fees are introduced in the future, the journal should establish and publish clear information concerning:

  • applicable charges;

  • waiver eligibility;

  • discount eligibility;

  • payment procedures; and

  • the relationship between financial assistance and editorial decisions.

Waiver requests must not influence peer review or acceptance decisions.

24. No Hidden Charges

The journal seeks to maintain transparency regarding all publication-related fees.

Authors should not encounter undisclosed mandatory charges after manuscript acceptance.

If any future fee is introduced, information concerning the amount, purpose, timing, and applicable conditions should be made publicly available before authors become financially obligated.

The journal should avoid ambiguous statements that could create uncertainty regarding publication costs.

25. No Withdrawal Fee

Under the journal's current fee policy, no withdrawal fee is charged.

Withdrawal requests should be evaluated according to the journal's Article Withdrawal Policy and the stage of manuscript processing rather than used as a mechanism for generating revenue.

The absence of a withdrawal fee does not remove an author's responsibility to communicate responsibly with the editorial office concerning withdrawal.

26. Page and Color Charges

The journal currently does not charge authors for page production or color content.

Authors should nevertheless ensure that tables, graphs, illustrations, and other visual materials are academically necessary, appropriately prepared, and compliant with applicable copyright requirements.

Absence of a color charge does not guarantee publication of unnecessary visual material.

27. Financial Transparency Before Submission

Authors should be able to determine the journal's applicable fee arrangements before submitting a manuscript.

The journal should maintain clear financial information through its:

  • APC Policy;

  • Revenue and Funding Model;

  • submission information; and

  • other relevant journal pages.

Contradictory fee information should be corrected promptly.

28. Changes to the Financial Model

The journal may revise its revenue or funding model in the future if operational circumstances change.

Any material change involving author-facing fees should be communicated transparently on the journal website before the new arrangement becomes applicable.

The journal should specify:

  • the type of charge;

  • amount;

  • currency;

  • articles or services to which it applies;

  • effective date; and

  • applicable waiver or exemption arrangements.

A new charge should not ordinarily be imposed retroactively on authors who submitted their manuscripts under a clearly stated no-fee policy unless they expressly agree to the changed terms.

29. Financial Terms Applicable at Submission

Where the journal modifies its fees, authors should ordinarily be governed by the publicly stated financial terms applicable to their submission, subject to any clearly communicated and mutually agreed changes.

This approach helps prevent unexpected publication charges and supports financial transparency.

30. Donations

If the journal or publisher accepts donations in support of scholarly-publishing activities, such contributions must not create editorial privileges.

Donors should not receive:

  • guaranteed publication;

  • preferential review;

  • influence over editorial decisions;

  • confidential manuscript information; or

  • control over research-integrity procedures.

Material donations that could reasonably create a perceived conflict should be disclosed where appropriate.

31. In-Kind Support

Support may sometimes be provided in forms other than direct financial payment.

In-kind support may include:

  • hosting;

  • software;

  • technical infrastructure;

  • editorial-management tools;

  • professional services;

  • training;

  • equipment; or

  • administrative assistance.

Where such support creates a material relationship capable of influencing journal operations, it should be managed transparently and should not compromise editorial independence.

32. Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher is responsible for supporting a financial and administrative environment in which editorial decisions can be made independently.

Publisher responsibilities include:

  • maintaining accurate fee information;

  • avoiding undisclosed author charges;

  • protecting editorial independence;

  • separating commercial arrangements from peer review;

  • ensuring that sponsors do not control editorial decisions;

  • supporting appropriate publishing infrastructure; and

  • correcting inaccurate financial information when identified.

33. Editorial Responsibilities

Editors should:

  • make decisions on scholarly grounds;

  • avoid financial incentives linked to acceptance;

  • disclose relevant financial conflicts;

  • recuse themselves when necessary;

  • protect reviewer independence;

  • resist inappropriate commercial pressure; and

  • ensure that legitimate corrections or retractions are not suppressed because of financial considerations.

Editorial performance should not be evaluated solely by the amount of revenue generated through accepted manuscripts.

34. Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for:

  • reviewing publicly available fee information before submission;

  • providing accurate research-funding disclosures;

  • identifying material sponsor involvement;

  • declaring relevant financial conflicts of interest;

  • reporting commercial support;

  • ensuring that funding statements are accurate; and

  • notifying the journal if published financial disclosures require correction.

35. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts independently of financial considerations.

Reviewers should not:

  • request payment from authors;

  • seek commercial benefit from confidential manuscripts;

  • recommend rejection to protect a competing financial interest;

  • use unpublished information for investment or commercial purposes; or

  • participate where a significant unmanaged financial conflict exists.

36. Financial Information and Peer Review

Authors' ability or inability to pay should not form part of scholarly peer review.

Reviewers should assess the manuscript's:

  • originality;

  • methodology;

  • evidence;

  • analysis;

  • reporting;

  • ethical integrity; and

  • scholarly significance.

Financial administration should remain outside the substantive peer-review assessment.

37. Corrections to Financial Disclosures

If a material funding or conflict-of-interest disclosure is found to be inaccurate after publication, the journal may issue an appropriate correction.

Where nondisclosure raises significant research-integrity concerns, additional editorial assessment may be conducted under the journal's applicable publication-ethics policies.

Not every omitted funding detail requires retraction; the response should be proportionate to its effect on the reliability and interpretation of the article.

38. Financial Misrepresentation

Deliberate falsification or concealment of material financial information may constitute a publication-integrity concern.

Examples may include:

  • concealing a commercial sponsor;

  • falsely claiming independent funding;

  • inventing a grant;

  • providing a false funding organization;

  • concealing ownership of a technology being evaluated; or

  • misrepresenting the role of a funder.

The journal may request clarification or supporting documentation where credible concerns arise.

39. Revenue and Research Integrity

The financial sustainability of the journal must not override its responsibility to protect the scholarly record.

The journal should be prepared to:

  • reject unsuitable manuscripts;

  • investigate misconduct;

  • issue corrections;

  • publish Expressions of Concern; and

  • retract unreliable articles

where warranted, regardless of any financial implications for the publisher or journal.

40. Transparency Concerning Financial Support

The journal should avoid vague or misleading claims concerning sponsorship, institutional support, grants, or financial partnerships.

An organization should be identified as a financial supporter only when a genuine and appropriately documented relationship exists.

Likewise, the journal should not imply financial independence from a supporting organization when significant dependence exists and disclosure is relevant.

41. Relationship With the APC Policy

This Revenue and Funding Model explains the broader financial structure and principles governing journal operations.

The separate APC Policy provides specific information concerning author-facing publication charges.

The two policies should remain consistent.

Where a discrepancy occurs, the journal should correct the relevant pages promptly so that authors receive clear financial information.

42. Relationship With the Advertising Policy

Any advertising arrangements are governed separately by the journal's Advertising Policy.

Advertising income, if applicable, must remain independent of manuscript selection, peer review, editorial decisions, and research-integrity procedures.

Editorial content should be visually and functionally distinguishable from paid advertising.

43. Relationship With the Conflict of Interest Policy

Financial relationships involving authors, reviewers, editors, funders, sponsors, or commercial organizations should also be evaluated under the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.

The Revenue and Funding Model addresses journal-level financial transparency, while the Conflict of Interest Policy addresses relationships capable of influencing individual scholarly responsibilities and decisions.

44. Annual and Periodic Review

The journal should periodically review its financial model to ensure that publicly displayed information remains accurate.

Review should consider:

  • author charges;

  • publisher support;

  • sponsorship;

  • advertising arrangements;

  • grants;

  • external funding;

  • in-kind contributions; and

  • other material sources of operational support.

Changes that materially affect authors or readers should be reflected on the journal website.

Commitment to Financial and Editorial Transparency

The Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances is committed to maintaining a publishing model in which financial arrangements are transparent and editorial judgments remain independent.

Under the journal's current policy, authors are not charged submission, editorial-processing, article-processing, page, color, or withdrawal fees. Financial support for journal operations must not purchase editorial influence, favorable peer review, guaranteed publication, suppression of criticism, or protection from appropriate post-publication action.

The journal seeks to ensure that its financial sustainability remains compatible with academic independence, equitable access to publication, responsible open-access dissemination, and protection of the integrity of the scholarly record.