Our ethics statement is informed by the “Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors” document developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), published in 2011. It also follows the “Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals” as produced by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Publication Ethics Committee.
DUTIES OF EDITORS
The Editorial Team of Patient Experience Journal (PXJ) is responsible for determining which of the articles submitted to the journal will be published. The Editorial Team reviews papers for relevance and rigor and refers to reviewer recommendations in making any final publication decision. All decisions are guided by legal requirements related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editorial decisions are not affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors.
Confidentiality, disclosure, and conflicts of interest
During the review process, editors will not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's or reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
All authors are required to disclose any conflict of interest at the time of submission and unless purposefully expressed or reported, no conflict-of-interest statements are required to be included in a published article. These can be included at the discretion of the author(s). Readers should be informed about who has funded any research or other scholarly work and if the funders had any role in the research, this should be clarified as part of any submission.
The Editorial Team strives to ensure that peer review at PXJ is fair, unbiased, and timely. PXJ works to maintain regular communications with authors about the status of submissions and potential publication. Please see Submission Guidelines for more information.
PXJ encourages reviewers to be comprehensive, open and constructive in their comments. Reviewers are also asked to comment on ethical questions and possible misconduct raised by submissions (e.g., unethical research design, insufficient detail on patient consent, inappropriate data manipulation), and to be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism. Reviewers’ comments are sent to authors in their entirety with all decision notifications unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks. Contributions of reviewers to the journal are regularly acknowledged. PXJ will cease to use reviewers who consistently produce discourteous, poor quality, or late reviews. You can review our full Peer Review Policy here for more information.
Editors take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that different sections have different aims and standards. Editors request assurances as part of the submission process that the research published has been approved by an appropriate body (e.g., research ethics committee, institutional review board) where one exists. Editors remain alert to intellectual property issues and work to avoid potential breaches of laws and conventions. Errors, inaccurate, or misleading statements will be asked to be corrected promptly and with due prominence.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to editorial decisions
Reviewers assist the Editorial Team in making editorial decisions. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Qualification of reviewersvAny selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should promptly notify the editor and excuse her or himself from the review process. 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.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors as possible. References to the ideas of others should be accompanied by the relevant citation in the format required by PXJ . 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.
Please see the full Peer Review Policy for additional information.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Authors submitting 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. Review articles should be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to raw data in connection with a paper and retain such data for at least two years after publication. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality, plagiarism and concurrent publication
Authors should ensure their work is entirely original and that any work and/or words of others have been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms and/or submitting essentially the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors must acknowledge they have no conflict of interest when submitting an article to PXJ. In submitting an article, an author attests that no conflict of interest exists. Any financial or other substantive support that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of a manuscript must be disclosed in their manuscript. All sources of financial support for a specific paper must also be disclosed.
Authorship of the paper
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate 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. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Please see the full Submission Guidelines for additional information regarding the submission process.