Guidelines and Policies
GUIDE FOR AUTHORS
Manuscript formats must be in accordance with the ICMJE-Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (updated in December 2019). Manuscripts that do not follow the instructions of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine will be returned to the authors for correction without further review. Therefore, the authors must carefully review the format of the journal to avoid loss of time and work.
The Editors of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine hold the right to make all the necessary changes to the language and style of the original manuscript in order to adhere to the uniform standards of the journal.
The manuscript files should be written in English in understandable style and checked for correct spelling and grammar. Authors whose first language is not English are strongly advised to have their manuscript edited by a language professional or native English speaker before the submission.
The manuscript should be typed in a Microsoft Word file, single-column format, 1.5 spaced with 2 cm margins on each side, and 10-point type in Times New Roman font.
All abbreviations in the text must be defined the first time they are used (both in the abstract and the main text), and the abbreviations should be displayed in parentheses after the definition. Abbreviations should be limited to those defined in the AMA Manual of Style, current edition. Authors should avoid abbreviations in the title and abstract.
The manuscript files should not contain any information about the authors and affiliation. This is important because all manuscripts are sent for blind peer review. Author contributions, conflict of interest and funding sources must be stated at the end of the manuscript before references.
The main article types of the journal are listed below:
Original Article: Original articles are manuscripts including substantial novel research such as randomized controlled trials, observational (cohort, case-control or cross-sectional) studies, descriptive studies, diagnostic accuracy studies, nonrandomized behavioral and public health intervention trials or experimental animal trials. Abstracts should not exceed 300 words and should be structured with these subheadings: Background, Methods, Results and Conclusions. The main text should be structured with these subheadings: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Acknowledgements, References. The manuscript should not exceed 5000 words, excluding abstract, references, tables and figure legends. There should be a maximum of 50 references.
Brief Report: Brief reports are short and peer-reviewed articles containing small case series, negative trials, the preliminary results and others that are not to be published as an original article. The manuscript should be less than 2000 words with a maximum 20 references and have no more than 3 display items (tables or figures). Abstracts should not exceed 250 words and should be structured with these subheadings: Background, Methods, Results and Conclusions. The main text should be structured with these subheadings: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Acknowledgements, References.
Review Article: Review articles are determined as detailed analyses of specific subjects in medicine. All review articles will also undergo peer review process. Review articles must not exceed 5000 words for the main text (excluding abstract, references, tables and figure legends) and 300 words for the abstract. The abstract does not need to be structured. A review article can have no more than 100 references.
Case Report: Interesting rare cases including a substantial novel finding can be reported. Abstracts of case reports should include information about the case and should be limited to a maximum of 250 words. The abstract does not need to be structured. The paper of case reports should be structured with these subheadings: Introduction, Case Report, Discussion and References. Case reports must not exceed 1500 words (excluding abstract, references, tables and figure legends). Case reports can have no more than 15 references and 3 figures or tables.
Clinical Image: Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine may publish original, interesting and high quality clinical images that have brief explanations (maximum 500 words, excluding references and figure legends). It can have no more than 5 references and 1 figure or table. Any information that might identify the patient should be removed from the image. An abstract is not required with this type of papers. The main text of clinical images should be structured with these subheadings: Case and References.
Letter to the Editor: Letters in reference to a journal article must not exceed 500 words (excluding references). Letters not related to a journal article must also not exceed 500 words (excluding references). An abstract is not required with this type of papers. A letter can have no more than 5 references and 1 figure or table. Authors might be asked for a reply to the letter. Replies must be submitted through submission system as well.
Editorial Comment: Editorial comment is a brief remark on an article published in the journal by the reviewer of the article or by a relevant authority. Most comments are invited by the Editor-in-Chief, but spontaneous comments are welcome. It must not exceed 750 words (excluding references). An abstract is not required with this type of papers. It can have no more than 10 references and 1 figure or table.
Others: Editorials, book reviews and reports on publication and research ethics are requested by the Editorial Board.
Type of Manuscript
Abstract Word Limit
These are not definite limits and may vary slightly depending on the condition of the article.
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine encourages the registration of all clinical trials via ClinicalTrials.gov or one of the registries of the WHO’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The name of the registry and the registration number together with the information of funding source should be provided at the end of the abstract.
Manuscript Preparation and Submission
The submission process for a manuscript is via our submission system or e-mail (email@example.com).
The submission should be divided into separate files in the following order:
1. Cover Letter
2. Title Page
3. Main Document (abstract, keywords, main text, references, tables and figure legends. The main document should not contain any information about the authors and affiliation)
5. The ICMJE Conflict of Interest Form
The cover letter should be a separate file and include the article title, article type and the full name of the corresponding author. The corresponding author should briefly describe the study and why the study is valuable for the scientific literature and give any other information regarding the manuscript that the Editors may find useful. The cover letter should also contain a statement declaring the absence or presence of a conflict of interest. Additionally, there should be a statement that the manuscript has not already been published, accepted or under simultaneous review for publication elsewhere. For manuscripts that have been presented orally or as a poster, this must be stated on the title page with the date and the place of the presentation.
The title page should be a separate file and include the complete manuscript title, the authors’ full names, affiliations (institution, department, city, country) and e-mail addresses, the corresponding author’s e-mail address and full mailing address (institution, department, street, street number, zip code, city, country). Please be informed that the e-mail address of corresponding author will be published in the final version of the article if it is accepted. For studies that have been presented orally or as a poster, the title page must include the information about where and when the study has previously been presented.
The main document should include the abstract, keywords, main text, references, tables and figure legends, respectively. Please be informed that the cover letter and title page are not included in the main file. Any information that may indicate an individual or institution should be excluded from the main document to ensure a blinded review process.
Original articles, review articles, brief reports and case reports should include an abstract. Abstracts for original articles and brief reports should be structured with these subheadings: Background, Methods, Results and Conclusions. Abstracts for review articles and case reports do not need to be structured. Clinical Images, Editorials, Letters to the Editor and Commentaries should not contain an abstract.
Please provide 3-10 keywords from the MeSH database, when possible, available at:http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html
In the introduction section, the authors should highlight new information in the manuscript, the hypothesis, and the aim of their work. The introduction section should not contain any results or conclusions.
The methods section should include the design and setting of the study, the characteristics of participants or description of materials, a clear description of all processes, interventions and comparisons and the type of statistical analysis used.
Laboratory values should be expressed using the International System of Units (SI). Generic drug names should generally be used. When proprietary brands are used in research, include the brand names in parentheses. The instruments (give the manufacturer’s name, town, and country in parentheses), and procedures should be described in sufficient detail to allow other researchers to reproduce the results. For well-established methods, only references should be provided.
When reporting trials on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards set by the responsible human experimentation committee (institutional and national) and Helsinki Declaration. All subjects should sign an informed consent form and this information should be expressed in the manuscript. Signed informed consent forms should be archived by the authors. The authors have to provide a written statement that they have received and archived all patient informed consent forms.
The results section should include the main or most important findings. The data presented in the tables or figures should not be repeated in the text. Graphs may be used as an alternative to tables with many entries. However, the same data should not be presented in both graphs and tables. Exact p-values should be provided for all tested differences (e.g., write p=0.024 instead of p<0.05) rounded to three decimal places.
The authors should emphasize the new and important conclusion based on the study results in the context of the best available evidence. The authors should not repeat the data presented in the introduction or results section. The limitation of the study should be stated.
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments section. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged.
Conflict of Interest
In this section, the authors should indicate whether there is a conflict of interest, or not. All financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared in this section. If you do not have any competing interests, please state "The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest." in this section.
The ICMJE Conflict of Interest Form should be filled for all authors and submitted to Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine together with the manuscript.
All sources of funding for the research should be declared. The role of the funding body in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript should be declared. If you do not have any funding sources, please state “The authors declare no funding for this research.”
Reference listings of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine must be in accordance with ICMJE standards and numbered consecutively at the end of the manuscript in the order in which they are mentioned in the text. While citing publications, preference should be given to the latest and most up to date publications. If an ahead of print publication is being cited the DOI number should be provided. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references. Journal titles should be abbreviated in accordance with the journal abbreviations in Index Medicus/Medline/PubMed. When there are 6 or less authors, all authors should be listed. If there are 7 or more authors the first 6 authors should be listed followed by “et al”. In the main text of the manuscript, references should be cited using Arabic numbers in brackets. The reference styles for different types of publications are presented in the following examples:
1. Journal article: Rose ME, Huerbin MB, Melick J, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Regulation of interstitial excitatory amino acid concentrations after cortical contusion injury. Brain Res. 2002;935(1-2):40-6.
2. Book: Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002.
3. Book chapter: Meltzer PS, Kallioniemi A, Trent JM. Chromosome alterations in human solid tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, editors. The genetic basis of human cancer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002:93-113.
4. Abstract: Lofwall MR, Strain EC, Brooner RK, Kindbom KA, Bigelow GE. Characteristics of older methadone maintenance (MM) patients (abstract). Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002;66:105.
5. Article in electronic format: Morse SS. Factors in the emergence of infectious diseases. Emerg Infect Dis (serial online) 1995 Jan-Mar (cited 1996 June 5): 1(1): (24 screens). Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2626828/pdf/8903148.pdf.
6. Internet: Do not just give URLs. Give the authors [if available], the organisation, the title of the webpage and the relevant section on the webpage, and a date if relevant. Provide the month and year the webpage was visited. Examples:
a) Heart Foundation. Information for professionals. Melbourne: Heart Foundation, 2011. Available from: http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/Information-for-professionals/pages/information-professionals.aspx (accessed Sep 2011).
b) Family Medicine Research Centre. Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH). Public BEACH data. Available from: http://www.fmrc.org.au/Beach/public_data.htm (accessed Sep 2011).
c) Cancer Council Australia [website]. Available from: http://www.cancer.org.au (accessed Oct 2011).
For other reference style, please refer to “ICMJE Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Sample References.”
Tables should be presented within the main document after the reference list. All tables should be referred to within the main text and they should be numbered consecutively in the order they are referred to within the main text. A descriptive title should be provided for all tables and the titles should be placed above the tables. Abbreviations used in the tables should be defined below the tables. Tables should be created using the “insert table” command of the word processing software and they should be arranged clearly to provide an easy reading.
Figures and Figure Legends
Figures, graphics and photographs should be submitted as separate files (tiff, jpeg or png format) through the submission system. They should not be embedded in the Microsoft Word document. When there are figure subunits, the subunits should not be merged to form a single image. Each subunit should be submitted separately through the submission system. Images should not be labelled (a, b, c, etc.) to indicate figure subunits. Thick and thin arrows, arrowheads, stars, asterisks and similar marks can be used on the images to support figure legends. The minimum resolution of each submitted figure should be 300 DPI and all submitted figures should be clear in resolution.
Figure legends should be listed at the end of the main document. When there are figure subunits, the figure legends should be structured in the following format.
ORCID IDs of all authors should be stated during the submission of manuscript. ORCID IDs will be increase transparence of journal and authors, it will also prevent the confusions caused by name similarities and affiliations. ORCID also increases the visibility of author and their works by keeping profiles up-to-date. All authors can create free accounts on https://orcid.org and get the personal 16-digits number.
Appeals and Complaints
Appeal and complaint cases are handled within the scope of COPE guidelines by the Editorial Board of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine. Appeals should be based on the scientific content of the manuscript. The final decision on the appeal and complaint is made by the Editor-in-Chief. The authors should get in contact with the Editor-in-Chief regarding their appeals and complaints via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org
Proofs and DOI Number
The manuscripts accepted for publication are provided with a DOI number immediately after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts are copy-edited for grammar, punctuation, and format. Once the publication process of a manuscript is completed it is published online on the journal’s webpage in Articles in Press before it is included in its scheduled issue. A PDF proof of the accepted manuscript is sent to the corresponding author and their publication approval is requested within 2 days of their receipt of the proof.
Submission and Publication Fees
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine is an open access fully refereed international medical journal without any submission and publication fees. All costs are sponsored by the Editorial Board of the journal.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine receives many more submissions than it can publish each month. It is therefore important that manuscripts are critically evaluated for compliance with the following criteria:
1. Strong evidence for the conclusions that are drawn.
2. Novelty (abstracts, meeting reports and www preprints are not considered to compromise novelty)
3. Broad biological significance..
4. Importance to the specific field.
The review process
All submitted manuscripts are assessed by the editor(s) for suitability for the review process. The views of an Editorial Board member may be sought for further input towards this decision. To save authors and referees time, only those manuscripts judged most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent out for formal review.
The journal adopts double blind review process which is closely monitored by the editors. Manuscripts that are sent for formal review typically go to two referees. Based on their advice, the editor decides to:
1. Accept the manuscript, with or without minor revision.
2. Invite the authors to revise the manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached.
3. Reject the manuscript, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.
Referees may recommend a particular course of action in their confidential comments to the editor, but should bear in mind that the editors may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice. Furthermore, editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, but rather are based on an evaluation of the strengths of the arguments raised by each referee and by the authors. The most useful referee reports, therefore, are those that set out clear, substantiated arguments and refrain from recommending a course of action in the comments directed to the authors.
Referees may, on occasion, be asked for further advice, particularly in cases where they disagree with one another, or where the authors believe that they have been misunderstood on points of fact. This kind of discussion is sometimes necessary to provide an effective and fair review process. We do understand, however, that referees are reluctant to be drawn into prolonged disputes, so we try to keep consultation to the minimum we judge necessary to come to a fair conclusion. In certain cases, additional referees or members of our Editorial Board may be consulted to resolve disputes, but this is avoided unless there is a specific issue on which further advice is required.
Referee selection is critical to the review process, and our choice is based on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, and our previous experience with the referee. We avoid using referees who are chronically slow, sloppy, too harsh or too lenient. We invite referees and only on acceptance of the invitation will a referee have access to the full paper.
Upon receiving a manuscript to referee
To avoid unnecessary delays in processing manuscripts, please do the following immediately upon receipt of a manuscript for review:
1. Double-check the deadline to ensure that there have been no misunderstandings regarding timing, and contact the editorial office immediately if you anticipate any difficulties in meeting it.
2. Read the editor's letter carefully and be sure to note any points specific to the manuscript for which the editor may have requested your opinion.
3. Skim the manuscript and consider whether there might be a conflict of interest for you (with the authors, their institution, their funding sources) and whether you can judge the article impartially.
4. Consider whether the topic seems to fit the scope of the journal and is likely to be of sufficient general interest for publication.
Referees should treat the review process as being strictly confidential, and should keep the following guidelines in mind:
1. Manuscripts refereed for Iberoam J Med should not be discussed with anyone not directly involved in the review process
2. If colleagues are consulted, they should be identified to the editors
3. If experts from outside the referee's own laboratory are consulted, referees should check with the editors beforehand to avoid involving anyone who may have been excluded by the editor
4. Referees should, as a rule, not disclose their identities to the authors or to other colleagues since they may be asked to comment on the criticisms of other referees and may then find it difficult to be objective. Should they feel strongly about making their identities known to the authors, they should do so via the editor. We strongly disapprove of any attempt by authors to determine the identities of referees or to confront them, and encourage referees to neither confirm nor deny any speculation in this regard.
Writing the report
The primary purpose of referee reports is to provide the editors with the information that they need to reach a decision, but they should also instruct the authors on how to strengthen their manuscript if revision is a possibility. Referees are asked to submit both confidential comments to the editor and those that can be directly transmitted to the authors. We recommend the following division of the report:
Comments for transmission to the authors
Referees are asked to maintain a positive and impartial, but critical, attitude in evaluating manuscripts. Criticisms should remain dispassionate; offensive language is not acceptable. As far as possible, a negative report should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that they can understand the basis for a decision to ask for revision or to reject the manuscript. Reviewer comments should be as specific and constructive as possible.
The ideal report should include:
1. An initial paragraph that summarizes the major findings and the referee's overall impressions, as well as highlighting major shortcomings of the manuscript.
2. Specific numbered comments, which may be broken down into major and minor criticisms if appropriate (numbering facilitates both the editor's evaluation of the manuscript and the authors' rebuttal to the report).
The report should answer the following questions:
1. What are the major claims and how significant are they?
2. Are the claims novel and convincing?
3. Are the claims appropriately discussed in the context of earlier literature?
4. Who will be interested and why?
5. Does the paper stand out in some way from the others in its field?
6. Are there other experiments or analyses that would strengthen the paper?
For manuscripts that may merit further consideration, it is also helpful if referees can provide advice on the following points where appropriate:
1. How the clarity of the writing might be improved (without necessarily going into specific details of spelling and grammar).
2. How the manuscript might be shortened.
3. How to do the study justice without overselling the claims.
4. How to represent earlier literature more fairly.
5. How to improve the presentation of methodological detail so that the experiments can be reproduced.
6. The submission of supplementary data on Iberoam J Med website to enhance the presentation (depositing, for example, raw data summarized in analytical figures, source code for modeling studies, microarray data, detailed methods, mathematical derivations, long tables, additional images and movies).
This author report should not include a recommendation regarding publication, which is regarded as confidential information since the final decision regarding acceptance, revision or rejection rests with the editor.
The manuscript should be rated, either on the form provided or in an e-mail, according to the following:
|Overall recommendation||Accept / Minor revision / Major revision / Reject|
|The article title and abstract are appropriate||Yes / No|
|The purpose of the article and its significance is stated clearly||Yes / No|
|The study methods are sound and appropriate||Yes / No|
|The writing is clear and concise||Yes / No|
|The conclusions or summary are accurate and supported by the content||Yes / No|
|The article is of interest to members of the education research community||Yes / No|
Additional confidential comments to the editor might include:
1. A definite recommendation regarding publication.
2. An assessment of how much any suggested additional experiments would improve the manuscript, and of how difficult they would be to complete within a reasonable timeframe (1-2 months).
3. In cases where the manuscript is unacceptable in its present form, an opinion about whether the study is sufficiently promising to encourage resubmission in the future.
Editing referee reports
As a matter of policy, we do not suppress referee reports. Comments intended for the authors are almost always transmitted. On rare occasions, however, we may edit a report where the referee has made an obvious factual mistake, or to remove offensive language, or comments that reveal confidential information. We ask referees to avoid saying anything that may cause needless offence, but also expect authors to recognize that fair criticisms are a valid part of the review process.
Iberoam J Med is committed to rapid editorial decisions and publication as efficiency in this process is a valuable service both to our authors and the scientific community as a whole. We therefore ask that referees respond promptly or inform us if they anticipate a significant delay. This allows us to keep the authors informed and, where necessary, find alternative referees.
Conflicts of interest
In order to ensure fairness in the referee process, we try to avoid referees who: have recent or ongoing collaborations with the authors, have commented on drafts of the manuscript, are in direct competition, have a history of dispute with the authors, or have a financial interest in the outcome. Because it is not possible for the editors to know of all possible biases we ask referees to draw our attention to anything that might affect their report, including commercial interests, and to decline to referee in cases where they feel unable to be objective. We do not find it necessary to exclude referees who have reviewed a paper for another journal; the fact that two journals have independently identified a particular person as well-qualified to referee a paper does not decrease the validity of her/his opinion in our view.
Iberoam J Med is committed to delivering high quality, fast peer-review for your paper, and as such has partnered with Publons. Publons is a third party service that seeks to track, verify and give credit for peer review. Reviewers for Iberoam J Med can opt in to Publons in order to claim their reviews or have them automatically verified and added to their reviewer profile. Reviewers claiming credit for their review will be associated with the relevant journal, but the article name, reviewer’s decision and the content of their review is not published on the site. For more information, visit the Publons website.
GUIDE FOR REVIEWERS
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine is an open access fully refereed international medical journal that publishes interesting original research conducted in all fields of medicine, interesting case reports and clinical images, reviews, editorials, letters, comments and letters to the Editor including reports on publication and research ethics. The journal is based on independent and unbiased double-blinded peer-reviewed principles. Only unpublished papers that are not under review for publication elsewhere can be submitted. The language of the journal is English.
The Editorial Board of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial and scientific content of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine and the timing of publication of the content.
Manuscripts that comply with the main rules of the journal are sent to at least two external reviewers, and the reviewers are asked for their opinion about the suitability of the paper for publication. The reviewed manuscripts are then re-reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board and a decision of rejection or acceptance is shaped.
All articles submitted to Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine for publication should be reviewed for their originality, methodology, importance, quality, ethical nature and suitability for the journal. If the reviewers need, they can go through Aims and Scope and Author Information for detailed information.
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine asks reviewers to make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. Peer reviewers should provide an objective critical evaluation of the paper in the broadest terms practicable. The reviewers’ reports should contain a recommendation and a description of their reasons for that recommendation. If the reviewers believe the paper needs changes to be made before it is acceptable, they should make suggestions on how to improve the paper. In the same way, if the reviewers feel that a paper is not good enough and has no real prospects of being improved sufficiently to be published they should recommend rejection. The reviewers may indicate if the manuscript requires its English grammar, punctuation or spelling to be corrected. Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine encourages the reviewers to comment on possible research or publication misconduct like unethical research design, duplication or plagiarism. If the reviewers have any suspect, the editors can provide them information obtained by plagiarism screening tools (i.e. iThenticate).
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine requests reviewers to treat the manuscripts in confidence. The material of the manuscripts must not be used or shared in any way until they have been published. Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine follows the COPE flowchart in cases of suspected reviewer misconduct. Please refer to COPE ethical guidelines for peer reviewers for "Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere" and "Expectations from reviewers".
If the reviewers have any potential conflict of interests, they must notify the Editor-in-Chief before agreeing to review a submission. The Editors will act in accordance with the relevant international rules of publication ethics such as COPE guidelines, ICMJE Recommendations or WAME resources if any ethical misconduct is suspected.
After review, review form must be submitted to email@example.com
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine endorses and strives to follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the World Association of Medical Editors guidelines on editorial independence, the publication best practices code by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the EQUATOR network checklists and advice for good research reporting.
Open Access Policy
Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supporting a greater global exchange of knowledge. Open access means that all content is freely available on the internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution and the only role for copyright in this domain, is given to authors to retain control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited. This is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
The articles in Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine are open access articles licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Ethical Guidelines for Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of ethical behaviors for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the peer reviewer, the journal editor, the publisher, the sponsor or the society. This becomes more important in the journals that publish papers in the field of medicine.
The Editors of Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine, as the publishers of the journal, take its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and they recognize the ethical and other responsibilities.
The editors committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial income has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Additionally, the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors. The Editors work closely with other publishers and industry associations to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.
Authors should present an accurate declaration of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. False or knowingly inaccurate explanations constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
The authors are required to declare in writing that they have complied with the Declaration of Helsinki Research Ethics in the treatment of their sample, human or animal, or to describe the details of treatment.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the data in connection with the paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if applicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should provide that they have written completely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms and all its forms constitute unethical publishing behavior and are unacceptable.
Multiple and Concurrent Publication
The authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
In general, the authors should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Proper acknowledgment of the study of others must be stated. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research, they should be acknowledged as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and contributors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the study involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly state these in the manuscript. If the study involves the use of animal or human subjects, the authors should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Conflicts of Interest and Financial Support
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Basic Errors in Published Papers
When the authors discover a significant error or mistake in the published paper, it is the authors’ obligation to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Contribution to Editorial Decision
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and forms the basis of the scientific method.
Promptness and Quality
Any selected referees who feel unqualified to review the study reported in a manuscript or know that its prompt review will be impossible should inform the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review process must be accepted as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
The reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting evidence.
The reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statements about observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should also inform the editor for any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflict of Interest and Financial Support
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or referees in making this decision.
The editor should examine the content of manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Conflicts of Interest and Financial Support
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own study without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through submission process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
The editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
The editors should request all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other interventions should be taken like the retraction of a publication or expression of concern.
It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.
Involvement and Cooperation
The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. These measures will usually include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. If the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or another note, as may be appropriate. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
These guidelines are prepared based on the Committee on Publication Ethics’ (COPE) Best Practice and Guidance.
Author's Rights and Obligations
All authors published their articles in Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine are entitled for following rights and obligations:
1. Authors hold full copyright and self-archiving rights, they transfer the publishing rights to Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine.
2. We do decline to publish material where a pre-print or working paper has been previously mounted online.
3. We allow authors to get their seminar papers published with note about the seminar if the paper is not mounted online.
4. The research and review papers published in Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine can be archived in any private of public archives online or offline. For this purpose, authors need to use the final published papers downloaded from http://www.iberoamericanjm.tk.
5. Authors are allowed to archive their article in open access repositories as “post-prints”. (Please note that: a post-print is the version incorporating changes and modifications resulting from peer-review comments.)
6. The authors need to acknowledge the original reference to the published paper when used in some other format like epub or audio files.
7. Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine offers Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License to researchers and scholars who use the content of the published papers.
8. Authors are free to use link to our published papers and share the published papers online or offline in the final format printed on the journal website.
9. Authors can index and store the published papers in the private or public archives or repositories like university database, internet archived, academia, researchgate etc.
10. We promote sharing of knowledge with due credit to the authors and researchers of the papers published with Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine.
Conflict of Interest Policy
Adopted from Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals which is prepared by WAME Editorial Policy and Publication Ethics Committees.
Articles would be published with statements or supporting documents declaring:
- Authors’ conflicts of interest; and
- Sources of support for the work, including sponsor names along with explanations of the role of those sources if any in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; the decision to submit the report for publication; or a statement declaring that the supporting source had no such involvement; and
- Whether the authors had access to the study data, with an explanation of the nature and extent of access, including whether access is on-going.
To support the above statements, editors may request that authors of a study sponsored by a funder with a proprietary or financial interest in the outcome sign a statement, such as “I had full access to all of the data in this study and I take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.”
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Satatement
Editorial and Peer Review Processes generally follow these steps:
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal "Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine". It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer(s) and the publisher.
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Duties of Editors
The editor of the GR is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
The authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to
permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
The authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. The authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Whether intentional or not, plagiarism is a serious violation. Plagiarism is the copying of ideas, text, data and other creative work (e.g. tables, figures and graphs) and presenting it as original research without proper citation. We define plagiarism as a case in which a paper reproduces another work with at least 20% similarity and without citation.
If evidence of plagiarism is found before/after acceptance or after publication of the paper, the author will be offered a chance for rebuttal. If the arguments are not found to be satisfactory, the manuscript will be retracted and the author sanctioned from publishing papers for a period to be determined by the responsible Editor(s).
Screening for Plagiarism
We check each submission for plagiarism at least two times (during the evaluation process and after acceptance) with dedicated software at www.ithenticate.com, to prevent such unethical practices.
Protection of Research Participants
Adopted from ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals.
When reporting experiments on people, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national), or if no formal ethics committee is available, with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2008. 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 institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.
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 potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. Applicable laws vary from locale to locale, and journals should establish their own policies with legal guidance. Since a journal that archives the consent will be aware of patient identity, some journals may decide that patient confidentiality is better guarded by having the author archive the consent and instead providing the journal with a written statement that attests that they have received and archived written patient consent.
Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are de-identified, authors should provide assurance, and editors should so note, that such changes do not distort scientific meaning.
The requirement for informed consent should be included in the journal’s instructions for authors. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.
When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether institutional and national standards for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed. Further guidance on animal research ethics is available from the International Association of Veterinary Editors’ Consensus Author Guidelines on Animal Ethics and Welfare.