Policy, Licensing and COI

 

Open Access Policy

All research articles published in JIM are fully open access and immediately freely accessible. Articles are posted online as soon as they have completed the production process in a fully citable form associated with a universal digital object identifier (DOI). Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license (see the Licensing section below) which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format (but not for commercial use), provided that the original work is properly cited. Articles can be freely downloaded from our website without the need for a journal subscription and/or login.

A complete version of the article and related supplementary material is deposited in the CLOCKSS repository in a suitable standard electronic format immediately after publication in JIM.

 

Editorial Process and Peer Review

JIM adopts single-blind peer review. Reviewers are anonymous unless they want to identify themselves by including their names in the review on our submission system. Selected reviewers need to declare the absence of a conflict of interest in order to proceed with the review process (for more information, please visit the section COI: Application to Reviewers).

Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer’s characteristics.

All contributions are initially handled by the Editor-in-Chief (or Deputy Editor) together with the Responsible Director. The Editor-in-Chief performs a preliminary assessment of the manuscript, focusing on the scientific content and overall relevance, while the Responsible Director verifies whether the submission complies with the journal’s editorial policies and ethical standards.

The subsequent decision may be peer reviewing or rejecting the manuscript. Only the manuscripts that meet our editorial criteria pass this first step and undergo external and internal peer review. Papers judged by the Editor as weak or otherwise inappropriate are rejected without undergoing further external peer review (although this decision may be based on informal advice from experts in the field). After this step, the Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy Editor assigns the manuscript to 2-4 internal and external peer reviewers.

In order to be eligible for the peer review of the manuscript, reviewers must confirm that they did not co-author articles with one or more of the authors of the manuscript during the last 5 years, that they are affiliated with institutions different from those of the authors and that they do not have any conflict of interest in relation to the content of the manuscript.

Following the reviewers’ report, the Editor-in-Chief (or the Deputy Editor on behalf of the Editor-in-Chief) makes a decision on the submitted article by considering the strength of the arguments raised by each reviewer. They may opt to accept the submission either with or without requiring revisions. Alternatively, they might suggest revisions to the authors, indicating specific areas for improvement before a final decision is made. In some cases, a rejection may be warranted, but with guidance for the authors on how further work could potentially justify a resubmission. Manuscripts may be rejected outright, typically due to limited relevance to the specialist audience, lack of originality, insufficient advancement in concepts, or significant technical or interpretational flaws. The Editor-in-Chief solely has final authority on acceptance, revision, or rejection.

The journal may ask for additional expert opinions, particularly when reviewers disagree with each other or the authors believe they have been misunderstood. We take reviewers’ criticisms seriously; in particular, we are very reluctant to disregard technical criticisms.

 

Authors’ Appeals

Articles that have been rejected may be resubmitted solely if all concerns outlined in the rejection feedback are thoroughly rectified and accompanied by a detailed letter delineating the resolution of these concerns. In no circumstances will an article be reconsidered if it was rejected due to significant issues.

The journal is open to authentic appeals concerning editorial decisions. Any appeal can be sent to submission.jim@verduci.it via an official letter signed by all authors, including the specific responses to any comments made by reviewers for rejection and any new information or data that the authors wish the journal to consider. It is imperative to substantiate your case with compelling evidence or novel data in response to the feedback provided by the editor and reviewers.

The Editor in Chief evaluates the authors’ argument alongside the reviewers’ reports to determine whether an additional opinion is necessary. The journal will promptly inform the authors about the outcome of the complaint. The Editor in Chief may either uphold the initial decision or invite authors to submit a revised version of the manuscript with updated information. Note that decisions on appeals are final. Please refrain from appealing the journal’s decision unless you can furnish a substantial body of evidence to support your complaint.

 

Timing

The journal evaluates all manuscript submissions as expeditiously as possible. Nonetheless, the duration of the peer-review process may vary depending on factors such as the availability of reviewers, the author’s response to revision timelines, and the extent of revisions needed. For instance, if there are conflicting reports from reviewers or if a report is delayed, additional expert opinions may be solicited. Additionally, revised manuscripts typically undergo reassessment by the original reviewers for feedback. Reviewers may also request multiple revisions of a manuscript. The editorial office responds promptly to authors upon receiving feedback from reviewers. Therefore, authors should only contact the editorial office in cases of significant delay, defined as exceeding 2 months since the last feedback.

 

Specific Policies

Submission by the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor: The Editor-in-Chief and the Deputy Editor do not handle their own submissions. Editorial Board Members, free from any conflict of interest, oversee the handling of submissions, assigning each manuscript to a minimum of two external reviewers. Final decisions regarding submissions are made by other Editorial Board Members who have no conflicts of interest with the authors. The annual total submissions should not exceed a reasonable number.

Submission by Editorial Board Members: Editorial Board Members can submit papers to the journal. However, these submissions do not receive preferential treatment or priority over other manuscripts, and being an Editorial Board Member does not influence editorial decisions. A paper submitted by Editorial Board Members will be handled by Editorial Board Members with no conflicts of interest with the manuscript or authors. At least two independent reviewers are selected as per journal policy. Editorial Board Members are not authorized to contact or request information about the peer-review process from other members of the editorial board or the Editor-in-Chief.

Submission by an author affiliated with the same institution as one of the journal’s Editors: A paper submitted by an author for whom potential COI exists (or who is affiliated with the same institution as one of the Editors) will be handled by a handling Editor who does not have any COI to disclose in relation to the review process and who is affiliated with a different institution. The handling Editor will recruit and select reviewers and make all the decisions on the paper. The same policy will apply to articles submitted by a member of the Editor family or by an author whose relationship with the Editor may create the perception of bias (e.g., close friendship or conflict/rivalry).

Potential COI for reviewers: The invitation letter to reviewers will include the following paragraph: “If you know or believe to know the identity of one or more of the authors, and if you feel that there is any potential conflict of interest in your review of this paper due to your relationship with the author (e.g., in terms of close friendship or conflict/rivalry) or due to any other reason, please declare it. By accepting this invitation, it is assumed that there is no potential conflict of interest to disclose”.

 

Publication Ethics and Recommendations

JIM follows the guidelines on Good Publication Practice: COPE and ICMJE. These guidelines aim to ensure that articles are published in a responsible and ethical manner.

Moreover, in accordance with the ICMJE’s Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, we expect that authors, reviewers and editors follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behavior.

Some specific information about the responsibilities of authors, the journal, and reviewers is as follows:

  • Authors and the Journal have to follow the Good Publication Practice: COPE and ICMJE guidelines. Please also check the Scientific Misconduct, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction guidelines from ICMJE.
  • JIM, authors, and reviewers have to guarantee confidentiality and not share information about manuscripts, including peer review, their content, or status in the review process, criticism by reviewers, and the final decision about rejection or acceptance to anyone other than the authors and reviewers.
  • JIM and reviewers have to ensure the timely processing of manuscripts. On the other hand, authors have to ensure timely communication and availability to reply to concerns during the review and publication process.
  • Peer review is the most critical assessment of the scientific process and should be followed rigorously. Specific information about our peer-review process can be found above.
  • Integrity should be the standpoint of both authors and the journal. The Editorial decisions about the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript should be based on the research’s originality, contribution to the scientific society, relevance to the topic of the journal, and quality standards. Those decisions should not be jeopardized by commercial interests or personal relations.
  • The spread of academic culture and scientific knowledge should also support diversity and inclusion for authors as well as reviewers, editorial board members and editorial staff.

 

Confidentiality and Pre-Publicity

Editors, authors, and reviewers are required to keep confidential all details of the editorial and peer review process for submitted manuscripts. The peer review process is confidential and conducted anonymously; the identities of reviewers are not released. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts. Correspondence with the journal, referees’ reports and other confidential material must not be published, disclosed or otherwise publicized without prior written consent. Our policy is to keep their names confidential and do our utmost to ensure this confidentiality. We cannot, however, guarantee the confidentiality of this information in the face of a successful legal action to disclose identity.

 

Authorship

Submitting to JIM indicates that all authors listed have consented to every aspect of the submission, including the order of authors and the statements regarding their contributions. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that this agreement has been achieved and that all authors have agreed to the submission, and is also in charge of managing all communication between the journal and all co-authors before and after publication. Any changes to the author list after submission need to be approved by every author.

According to the ICMJE recommendations, authorship is based on 4 criteria:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
  2. Drafting the work or reviewing 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.

The author list should include all appropriate researchers and no others. Authorship provides credit for a researcher’s contributions to a study and carries accountability. JIM does not prescribe the kinds of contributions that warrant authorship but encourages transparency by publishing author contributions statements since the Journal is not in a position to investigate or adjudicate authorship disputes before or after publication. Such disagreements, if they cannot be resolved amongst authors, should be brought up to the relevant institutional authority.

The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may also be stated.

 

Corresponding Authors’ Responsibilities

The corresponding author is solely responsible for communicating with the journal and managing communication between coauthors. Before submission, the corresponding author ensures that all authors are included in the author list, that its order has been agreed upon by all authors, and that all authors are aware that the paper was submitted.

The corresponding author also must clearly identify at submission any material within the manuscript that has previously been published elsewhere by other authors (for example, figures) and provide written permission from those authors and/or publishers for the re-use of such material. He/She/They have 3 months to submit the revised version of the manuscript.

After acceptance, the galley proof is sent to the corresponding author, who shares it with all coauthors and deals with the journal on their behalf; the journal will not necessarily correct errors after publication if they result from errors that were present on a galley proof that was not shown to coauthors before publication. The corresponding author is responsible for the accuracy of all contents in the galley proof, in particular, that the names of coauthors are present and correctly spelled and that affiliations are correct.

The name and e-mail address of the corresponding author are published in the paper.

Authors of published material have a responsibility to inform the journal promptly if they become aware of any part that requires correcting. Any published correction requires the consent of all co-authors, so time is saved if requests for corrections are accompanied by a signed agreement by all authors. In cases where one or some authors do not agree with the correction statement, the coordinating author must include correspondence to and from the dissenting author(s).

 

Changes to Authorship

Authors should carefully consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the first submission. Any deletion, addition or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list can be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the Editor-in-Chief.

To request this change, the Editor-in-Chief must receive a letter from the Corresponding Author (at submission.jim@verduci.it) specifying the reason for the change in the author list, along with a written confirmation letter from all authors that they agree with the removal, addition, or rearrangement. In the case of removal or addition of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being removed or added.

Should the corresponding author fail to fulfill the aforementioned responsibilities (e.g., not responding to critical emails, not aiding authors in journal-related requests), the journal reserves the prerogative to communicate with all authors to resolve any disputes or issues. For instance, if an author contacts the editorial office seeking modifications to the article, the corresponding author must provide consent within a reasonable timeframe. Should the corresponding author neglect to do so, the journal may exceptionally consider the request from the other author if accompanied by a letter signed by all other authors.

 

Data and Materials Availability

A foundational principle of publication entails enabling others to replicate and advance the claims made by authors in their published works. A requisite for publication in JIM is that authors must promptly provide materials, data, code, and associated protocols to readers without undue restrictions. This requirement aims to enhance the transparency and reproducibility of published results.

All original research manuscripts published in our journal must include a data availability statement. In cases where no new data have been generated, such as in a review, the statement “No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data Availability is not applicable to this article” should be included.

The data availability statement must transparently outline the conditions for accessing the “minimum dataset” essential for interpreting, verifying, and extending the research in the article. The manuscript should specify who will make the data available, and any sharing restrictions must be discussed with the editor upon submission, who reserves the right to decline the study if these conditions are deemed unduly prohibitive. It is generally expected that the corresponding author (or relevant designated authors) will be responsible for the availability of data and materials unless stated otherwise.

Any restrictions on the availability of materials or information must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission, and such restrictions must also be disclosed in the submitted manuscript. Editors may decline further consideration of the manuscript if restrictions are found to be excessively prohibitive after evaluation.

Data availability statements should include pertinent information on the following aspects:

Access to primary datasets (generated during the study) and referenced datasets (analyzed in the study) must be provided. Accession codes or other unique identifiers, if relevant and publicly available, should be provided.

– For clinical trial data, authors should adhere to ICMJE guidelines, providing details on the sharing of de-identified participant data, specific data to be shared, availability of related documents, timeline for data availability, access criteria, and mechanism for sharing.

Examples of data-sharing statements can be found in Table 1 of the following link.

– Third-party data should be made available for peer-review upon request, within the terms of a data use agreement, and in compliance with ethical and legal requirements.

  • Proprietary data: It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure and obtain an agreement with the third-party data provider, ensuring that the datasets utilized in the study will be accessible under the conditions specified in the data availability statement.
  • Administrative data (including data maintained by governments, local authorities, and international organizations): Research utilizing administrative data must ensure adherence to local regulatory and legal frameworks governing data usage.

When third-party data cannot be made available, the data availability statement should clearly state the restrictions.

Including large datasets in supplementary information is not recommended. The preferred approach is to make the data accessible through repositories.

 

Data retention 

Authors are required to maintain the data utilized in their publication for a duration of 10 years. The journal reserves the prerogative to request access to all data in cases involving allegations of research or publication misconduct.

 

Data citation

Datasets deposited in repositories should be formally cited in the article reference list, including authors, title, publisher (repository name), and identifier. The accession number must also be provided in the paper for datasets.

Readers encountering refusal by authors to comply with these policies after publication should contact the Editor in Chief. In unresolved cases, the journal may involve the authors’ funding institution and/or publish a formal correction statement online, acknowledging the inability of readers to obtain necessary materials for replication.

 

Plagiarism and Other Types of Unethical Publication Practice

JIM disapproves any kind of malpractice and unethical publication practice. With regard to plagiarism or other types of unethical publication practice, Authors who wish to publish in our journal must follow the guidelines on Good Publication Practice as reported in COPE and Council of Science Editors. These guidelines aim to ensure that articles are published in a responsible and ethical manner.

Scientific misconduct in both research and non-research publications encompasses various acts, including but not limited to data fabrication, data falsification (including deceptive manipulation of images), intentional failure to disclose relationships and activities, and plagiarism. In cases where scientific misconduct is suspected or concerns arise regarding the conduct or integrity of work presented in submitted or published papers, the journal promptly initiates an investigation in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

For submitted articles, should editors receive evidence, possibly from reviewers, regarding serious misconduct, they will share this information with the relevant institutions while also informing the authors of their actions. Where allegations of serious misconduct lack persuasive evidence, editors may seek expert guidance. If the experts ascertain no indications of misconduct, the editorial process will continue as usual.

For published articles, if any violation or unethical practice is raised after publication, the Editor in Chief can decide to start an independent investigation with a new set of reviewers. Based on the outcome of the investigation, the Editor in Chief may decide to publish an expression of concern to inform readers that an investigation is ongoing or to retract the article.

 

Plagiarism

Our journal uses certified plagiarism checker software (Grammarly®) to verify the authenticity of articles and detect duplications from each article’s content online against billions of web pages. By submitting manuscripts to the journal, authors accept that their work will be checked for plagiarism from previously published articles.

Articles that represent suspected cases of plagiarism or other unethical practices undergo a careful check for accuracy by the reviewer(s) and Editors. Our anti-plagiarism software, however, is not able to identify the so-called “salami slicing”. Therefore, it is imperative that each case is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. We do not advocate the use of one statement of actions to penalize the offender. Each case is considered separately, and, as Editors, we will need to decide if the suspected case of plagiarism or unethical publication practice is a deliberate action on the part of the author or if it is due to a lack of understanding of the requirements of ethical writing. This can happen for new authors or some authors for whom English translation is difficult. An example of this is when there are no words/phrases in the author-specific language that properly translate into English.

The utilization of text copied from another source requires a citation from the original source. If a study’s design or the structure and language of the manuscript have been influenced by prior studies, it is essential to explicitly reference these studies.

 

Duplicate Publication

Material submitted to JIM must be original and not published or submitted for publication elsewhere. This rule applies to material submitted elsewhere while the JIM contribution is under consideration.

A duplicate publication is a publication that significantly overlaps with a prior publication by sharing the same hypothesis, data, discussion, and conclusions without an evident and clear reference to the previous study. The journal considers this behavior unethical. If part of a contribution that an author wishes to submit to JIM has appeared or will appear elsewhere, the author must specify the details in the cover letter accompanying the submission. The journal retains the authority to reject any submitted manuscripts without prior notification in the event of duplicate content. If the journal was previously unaware of the duplicate publications, it may deem it necessary to retract the article, regardless of the author’s explanation or consent. JIM follows the COPE guidelines for duplicate publication.

  • Publishing an abstract in earlier meeting proceedings does not prevent subsequent submission for publication. However, it is mandatory to fully disclose this issue during the submission process.
  • Translating and republishing a paper in another language is allowed, as long as the translation faithfully reflects the original content, including the same data, information, and results. The original source must be clearly disclosed in both the cover letter and the manuscript upon submission. Failure to do so at submission will lead to rejection.

 

Image Integrity and Manipulation

Images submitted with a manuscript for review should be minimally processed (for instance, to add arrows to a micrograph). Authors should retain their unprocessed data and metadata files, as editors may request them to aid in manuscript evaluation. All digitized images submitted with the final revision of the manuscript must be of high quality.

Positive and negative controls, as well as molecular size markers, should be included on each gel and blot – either in the main figure or an expanded data supplementary figure.

The authors should provide the editors with original data on request. Cells from multiple fields should not be juxtaposed in a single field; instead, multiple supporting fields of cells should be shown as Supplementary Information. Threshold manipulation, expansion or contraction of signal ranges, and the altering of high signals should be avoided. If “pseudo-coloring” and nonlinear adjustment (for example, “gamma changes”) are used, this must be disclosed. Adjustments of individual color channels are sometimes necessary on “merged” images, but this should be noted in the figure legend.

Improper technical manipulation includes obscuring, enhancing, deleting, or introducing new elements into an image. If there are concerns about the authenticity of an author’s figures, the Editor in Chief reserves the right to request the original data from the authors and to reject the manuscript in case of suspect figure manipulation. The journal employs accredited software to identify integrity concerns in figures. By submitting their manuscript to the journal, authors acknowledge that their work may undergo screening to detect any instances of image duplication or manipulation. The journal adheres to COPE guidelines to deal with concerns of image manipulation after publication.

 

Original Images of Blots and Gels

To uphold the integrity and scientific validity of blotting techniques, i.e., Western blots and the reporting of gel data, authors are advised to upload original, uncropped, and unadjusted images as Supporting Information files when submitting their manuscript initially.

Therefore, it is strongly suggested to include either a single PDF file or a zip folder containing all original images featured in the manuscript figures and, if applicable, supplementary figures. Authors are required to label each original image to correspond with the figures in the main article.

Furthermore, all experimental samples and controls used for comparative analysis should be run on the same blot/gel image, and the practice of splicing together different images to depict results should be avoided.

 

Requirements for Reuse of Published Figures

If an author of a submission is re-using a figure or figures published elsewhere or that are copyrighted, the author must provide documentation that the previous publisher or copyright holder has given permission for the figure to be re-published. JIM editors consider all material in good faith that their journal has full permission to publish every part of the submitted material, including illustrations.

 

Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation refers to the inclusion of references in articles that do not significantly contribute to the scholarly content but are included solely to boost citation metrics.

While citing one’s previous work can be justified for scholarly reasons, such as continuity in research or to prevent accusations of self-plagiarism, editors and authors engaging in citation manipulation violate publishing best practices.

If editors, board members, reviewers, or authors add or request citations with purely self-promotional intentions, such actions contravene publication ethics and are deemed unethical.

Furthermore, irrespective of whether they are requested or not, citations should not be included under the assumption that doing so will enhance the chances of the publication being accepted. For more information, check the COPE document on citation manipulation and best practices.

JIM mandates that self-citations should not surpass 15% of the total references. It is important to note that this percentage is approximate, as the editors reserve the right to assess each case individually and determine whether additional references (self-citations) are necessary to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the research.

 

Ethics

Human subjects

According to the ICMJE recommendations, all investigators should ensure that the planning, conduct, and reporting of human research are in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013. All authors should seek approval to conduct research from an independent local, regional, or national review body (e.g., ethics committee, institutional review board) and be prepared to provide documentation if requested by the editor during the review process. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the local, regional or national review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. Approval by a responsible review body does not preclude editors from forming their own judgment on whether the conduct of the research was appropriate. All research on humans must have approval from the IRB (Institutional Review Board) or from equivalent local Ethics Committees. The age and gender of all subjects should be provided in the main text or in the Supplementary Material.

  • Helsinki Declaration: When reporting experiments on human subjects, all investigators should ensure that the planning, conduct, and reporting of human research are in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (as revised in 2013).

For non-interventional studies (e.g., surveys, cross-sectional studies, etc.), all participants must be fully informed about anonymity, how the data will be used, the reason for the research, and if there are any associated risks. As with all research involving humans, surveys with patients or the general public must obtain ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee or an official IRB exemptionbefore conducting the study. The journal retains the authority to ask authors for documentation, such as the approval/exemption letter, survey questionnaire, and informed consent procedure/form.

Ethics Committee approval is deemed necessary for retrospective observational studies.

The name, date, and protocol number of the Ethics Committee approval must always be disclosed in the Ethics Approval statement and/or in the Materials/Patients and Methods section.

If the authors have submitted the approval request to the Ethics committee and the committee determines that no approval is required, the name of the ethics committee granting this exemption should be mentioned in the ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ or ‘Ethics Approval Statement,’ accompanied by a comprehensive explanation of the ethical approval waiver. 

 

Informed Consent

All research involving human participants necessitates informed consent from the participants or their parents/legal guardians, and this consent should be explicitly mentioned in the final statement of the manuscript. Manuscripts reporting studies involving vulnerable groups or cases where consent might not be fully informed will be subject to the editor’s discretion.

For survey/questionnaire studies involving patients or the general public, written informed consent is mandatory. Participants must be clearly informed about the study’s purpose, their voluntary involvement, and data confidentiality. In cases involving healthcare professionals or institutional settings, where data collection is part of routine administrative, evaluative, or quality improvement activities, informed consent may be considered implicit, as participation is entirely voluntary and free from coercion and provided that no sensitive personal data are collected, responses are anonymous or de-identified, the study does not involve interventions or pose any risk to participants.

Appropriate consents, permissions and releases must be obtained in case authors wish to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals in their publication. This is to comply with all applicable laws and regulations concerning the privacy and/or security of personal information, including, but not limited to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679.

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potentially identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication.

Examples of ethics and informed consent statement:

  1. Original article: “All subjects provided written informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (as revised in 2013), and the protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of NAME OF THE INSTITUTE (project or protocol identification number XXX and date of approval).” OR “Ethical review and approval were waived for this study, due to REASON (please provide a detailed justification).”
  2. Case report: “Written informed consent was provided by the patient (and/or his/her parents) for permission to receive therapy and to publish this case report.”

Please note that photographs of patients or research subjects should not be used unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and explicit permission has been given by the patient or research subject as part of the informed consent. Such photographs should be anonymized using boxes or dots or shades covering eyes and/or other identifying details. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, authors should provide assurance that such alterations do not affect the scientific meaning. If consent has not been obtained, it is not sufficient to anonymize a photograph simply by using eye bars or blurring the face of the subject. Formal consents are not required for the use of entirely anonymized images from which the individual cannot be identified (e.g., X-rays, ultrasound images, computed tomography/magnetic resonance scans, etc.).

 

Some Considerations

  • Images of patients or research subjects should not be used unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and explicit permission has been given as part of the consent.
    • If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, authors should provide assurances that such alterations do not distort scientific meaning.
    • Formal consents are not required for the use of entirely anonymized images from which the individual cannot be identified – for example, x-rays, ultrasound images, laparoscopic images, etc.
    • If consent has not been obtained, it is generally not sufficient to anonymize a photograph simply by using eye bars or blurring the face of the individual concerned.

 

Animal Studies

Research involving animals should adhere to globally recognized standards and to the ARRIVE guidelines for documenting experiments involving live animals. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether institutional and national standards for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed, but in questionable matters, the Editors reserve the right to reject papers. This statement is mandatory for acceptance and publication of the manuscript. Authors should ensure that the experimental conditions and procedures of their research minimize any harm to animals.

Animal species/strain, sex, source (vendor name, location), age range, weight and any additional data should be indicated. Please note that we encourage the use of both male and female animals. The use of single-sex should be scientifically justified.

The project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in the “Ethics Approval” statement. Research procedures must be carried out in accordance with national and institutional regulations. Statements on animal welfare should confirm that the study complied with all relevant legislation.

 

Cell Lines

The Materials and Methods section should report the origin of any cell lines. The contamination or misidentification of cell lines negatively impacts the validity of research observations. Therefore, authors are required to describe the source of the cell line, as well as the method used for authentication, in the Materials and Methods section. References must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. Confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin in case de novo cell lines were used. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.

 

Clinical Trials

All clinical trials submitted to JIM for consideration of publication must be registered in accordance with the ICMJE recommendation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) defines a clinical trial as “any research project that prospectively assigns people or a group of people to an intervention, with or without concurrent comparison or control groups, to study the relationship between a health-related intervention and a health outcome. Health-related interventions are those used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome; examples include drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, and process-of-care changes.”

When submitting your manuscript, please include the unique trial number and the name of the registry (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov or ISRCTN) at the end of the abstract and in your cover letter. It is mandatory that registration be completed at the time of obtaining the first participation consent. Acceptable registries should contain a minimum 24-item trial registration dataset at the time of registration and must be a primary register of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

To align with ICMJE policy, investigators registering device trials on ClinicalTrials.gov must select the option of public posting before device approval, thus opting out of the lock box. Approval to conduct a study by an independent local, regional, or national review body (e.g., ethics committee, institutional review board) does not fulfill the ICMJE requirement for prospective clinical trial registration. For instance, registering retrospectively at the point of manuscript submission fails to fulfill ICMJE requirements.

Secondary analyses of primary clinical trials should be referenced by the trial registration number of the primary trial rather than being registered as distinct clinical trials. This information must also be disclosed in the statements and authors must cite the source by inserting the unique identifier.


Conflicts of Interest (COI)

Definition

Competing interests are defined as any situation wherein multiple interests, financial involvements, or other factors exist that, through their potential influence on behavior or content or from the perception of such potential influences, could undermine the objectivity, integrity, or perceived value of a publication.

Please regard the following items as illustrative examples, though not exhaustive, of significant conflicts of interest.

  • Funding: This pertains to support for research activities, which could include salaries, equipment, supplies, reimbursement for attending conferences, and other related expenses, provided by organizations that stand to benefit financially from the outcomes of the publication.
  • Employment: This encompasses any recent, current, or expected employment by organizations that could experience financial gain or loss as a result of the publication, particularly if such employment occurred during the research project.
  • Personal Financial Interests: Financial conflicts arise when participants in the publication process receive or expect to receive monetary compensation, gifts, patents, or stocks that could influence their work on a specific publication. This involves ownership of stocks or shares in companies that may be influenced financially by the publication, receipt of consultation fees or other forms of compensation from organizations affected by the publication’s outcomes, and possession of patents or patent applications whose value could be impacted by the publication.
  • Personal relationships: Interpersonal connections with family, friends, adversaries, rivals, or associates can present conflicts of interest. For instance, a reviewer might struggle to deliver an impartial assessment of articles authored by individuals with whom they share a working history.

 

COI: Application to Authors

At the time of submission, JIM policy requires that authors disclose potential conflicts of interest (COI), including financial interests, direct and indirect connections, or any other situation that could raise questions of bias in either the reported work or its conclusions, implications, or related opinions. Potential COI to be disclosed include any relevant commercial or noncommercial source of funding for either author(s), or the sponsoring institution, the associated department(s) or organization(s). When considering whether you should declare a COI, please consider the following question: “Is there any arrangement that would embarrass you or any of your co-authors, which you did not declare and would emerge after publication?”.

As an integral part of the online submission process, Corresponding Authors are required to confirm whether they or their co-authors have any COI to disclose. If the Corresponding Author is unable to confirm this information on behalf of all co-authors, the other authors will then be required to send a completed COI form to the Editorial Office. It is the Corresponding Author’s responsibility to ensure that all authors adhere to this policy. Information on potential COI must be reported in the manuscript (see Instructions for authors).

 

COI in Industry-Sponsored Research

Authors whose manuscripts are submitted for publication must declare all relevant sources of funding in support of the preparation of a manuscript. JIM requires full disclosure of financial support as to whether it is from the tobacco industry, the pharmaceutical or any other industry, government agencies, or any other source. This information should be included in the Conflict of Interest section of the manuscript (see Instructions for authors). Authors are required to specify sources of funding for the study and to indicate whether the text was reviewed by the sponsor prior to submission (e.g., whether the study was written with full investigator access to all relevant data and whether the sponsor exerted editorial influence over the written text). This information should be included in the Cover letter. In addition to the disclosure of direct financial support to the authors or their laboratory and prior sponsor’s review of the paper, authors are required to disclose all relevant consultancies within 12 months prior to submission, since the views expressed in the contribution could be influenced by the opinions they have expressed privately as consultants.

In the event that a previously undisclosed potential competing interest of a published paper comes to the attention of the editors, the journal will start an investigation as per COPE flowchart, reassessing the article to evaluate whether to apply for a retraction or publish an erratum in a future volume of the journal.

Regarding unethical publication practices, the journal follows the guidelines on Good Publication Practice as reported by COPE and the Council of Science Editors.

 

COI: Application to Reviewers

Reviewers and external peer reviewers must disclose to Editors any COI that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and they should disqualify themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if they deem it as appropriate. As in the case of authors, silence on the part of reviewers concerning potential COI may mean either that such COI exists but has not been properly disclosed, or that COI do not exist. Reviewers must therefore also be asked to state explicitly whether COI exist or do not exist. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work before its publication to further their own interests. COI for a given manuscript exists when a participant in the peer review and publication process (e.g., author, reviewer, editor) has ties to activities that could inappropriately influence his or her judgment, regardless of whether the judgment is affected. Financial relationships with industry (e.g., employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family, are usually considered the most important COI. However, COI can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion. Additional details are available from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Annals of Internal Medicine 118, (8) 646-647.

 

COI: Application to Editors and Editorial Office

Editors responsible for final manuscript decisions should refrain from participating in editorial processes if they have relationships or engagements that could result in potential conflicts concerning the articles under consideration.

Editorial staff involved in editorial decisions must disclose any relevant relationships or activities that may influence editorial judgments and abstain from decisions where a potential conflict of interest exists.

The same policies are applied to Guest Editors.

 

COI: Application to Publishing Policy

JIM thrives on its independence. Our strict policy is that editorial independence, decisions and content should not be compromised by commercial or financial interests, or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors.

 

Advertising Policies – Reprints

Verduci Editore applies the following procedures for advertising from companies, societies, or other organizations:

  1. all advertising (or sponsorship) must first be approved by the publisher. Verduci Editore may refuse to accept sponsorship from any commercial enterprise, company or industry without needing to provide any justification for its decision;
  2. all advertising (or sponsorship) is always handled separately from editorial content. Indeed, editorial decisions are never influenced by potential advertising or reprint revenues and sponsors do not have any kind of control in the editorial and decision process;
  3. sponsors are requested to confirm this declaration of sponsorship in accordance with the aims of Verduci Editore to guarantee editorial autonomy.

Commercial reprints are an excellent way for companies to promote and inform the medical community about their activities. They are recognized as a credible and timely source of information; in this regard, Verduci Editore allows only institutional and/or pathology advertising and refuses any kind of product sponsorship.

 

Permission to Reproduce Materials

Obtaining permission to reproduce any copyrighted, published material, such as figures, schemes, or tables, is mandatory. Therefore, authors must request permission from the copyright holder to use the above-mentioned materials and provide documentation that the previous publisher or copyright holder has given appropriate permission.

Please be mindful that obtaining permission is required for:

  • Authors’ original work for which the Publisher holds the copyright (this applies to photographs and/or figures as well). Conversely, no permission is required for reconstructing an author’s own table with data previously published elsewhere, provided that proper citation of the data source is included.
  • Any utilization of unchanged or minimally altered tables, graphs, charts, or schemes from a published article.
  • Images found on the Internet are typically protected by copyright and will necessitate permission for reuse unless the author and/or owner has explicitly stated that the image is freely available. If credits are required to reuse an image, this information should be mentioned within the figure caption.

 

Preservation and Archiving

JIM is committed to ensuring the permanent availability, accessibility, and preservation of scholarly research by upgrading digital file formats to comply with new technology standards. All our files and manuscripts are archived and preserved in CLOCKSS. 

 

Licensing

JIM applies a Creative Commons Attribution license “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International” (License; CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)  to all articles published in the journal. If authors submit their paper for consideration of publication in our journal, they agree to have the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license applied to their work as follows:

  1. BY) Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. NC) NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
  3. ND) NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

No additional restrictions: You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices: you do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation. No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.