Editorial Policies
JPAN follows rigorous editorial standards to ensure transparent, ethical, and high-quality publication in pancreatic research.
Peer Review
Ethics
Conflicts
Data
Corrections
Integrity
Policy Commitments
Core PrinciplesPeer Review
Single blind peer review with expert reviewers evaluating rigor, novelty, and clinical relevance.
Ethical Compliance
Human and animal research requires approvals, consent statements, and biosafety compliance.
Data Transparency
Data availability statements and repository deposition support reproducibility and trust.
Conflicts Of Interest
Authors must disclose financial or institutional relationships that could influence results. Transparency supports reader trust.
Misconduct Handling
Suspected misconduct is investigated following COPE guidance. Corrections or retractions are issued when needed.
Authorship
All authors must meet contribution criteria and approve the final manuscript. Contributor statements reduce disputes.
Appeals
Authors may appeal decisions with scientific justification. Appeals are reviewed by senior editors independent of original decisions.
Editorial policies apply consistently across all submissions, including invited content, to maintain fairness.
Editorial decisions are independent of APCs or commercial considerations. Scientific merit drives all decisions.
Ethics Safeguards
IntegrityConflict Management
Editors and reviewers disclose conflicts to protect independence and maintain trust in decisions.
Corrections
Post publication updates, corrections, or retractions follow clear procedures to preserve the record.
Misconduct Review
Suspected misconduct triggers investigation according to COPE aligned principles.
Additional Notes
GuidanceSubmission Support
Contact [email protected] with brief questions to avoid delays during submission.
Workflow
Clear documentation and timely responses help keep editorial timelines on track.
Visibility
Well structured manuscripts improve search visibility and long term impact.
Editorial Workflow
ProcessInitial Screening
Submissions are screened for scope fit, ethics, and completeness before peer review begins.
Peer Review
Specialist reviewers assess scientific rigor, novelty, and clinical relevance for pancreatic practice.
Production
Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, proof review, and DOI assignment before publication.
License And Reuse
RightsAttribution
Reuse requires proper citation and credit to authors and the journal.
Third Party Content
Secure permissions for previously published figures or tables before submission.
Author Rights
Authors may deposit accepted versions in repositories according to license terms.
Policy Implementation Standards
GovernanceConsistency Across Decisions
Editorial policy has value only when applied consistently across manuscript types, author groups, and research settings. JPAN decision governance requires transparent criteria, documented rationale, and conflict free handling so outcomes remain fair, auditable, and trusted by the pancreatic research community.
Integrity Risk Escalation
When integrity concerns arise, the journal follows formal escalation steps with evidence collection, author communication, and documented resolution pathways. Structured escalation protects both the scholarly record and author rights while ensuring that serious concerns receive timely and proportionate review.
Post Publication Stewardship
Policy responsibilities continue after publication through correction handling, expression of concern review, and retraction processes where necessary. Transparent stewardship demonstrates editorial maturity and protects long term confidence in published pancreatic evidence.
Author And Reviewer Accountability
Quality ControlsDisclosure Discipline
Complete funding and conflict disclosure is mandatory for authors, editors, and reviewers. Transparent disclosure allows readers to interpret findings within appropriate context and supports confidence in editorial impartiality.
Review Conduct Standards
Reviewer reports must remain evidence based, respectful, and specific enough to guide revision. Policy alignment on review quality protects author experience and improves editorial decision reliability.
Documentation Quality
Decision records, correspondence, and procedural notes are maintained with audit readiness in mind. Strong documentation supports internal quality improvement and defensible governance outcomes.
High trust journals apply policy consistently across all manuscripts, regardless of author profile or institutional affiliation. JPAN policy execution emphasizes documented reasoning, timely escalation of integrity concerns, and transparent communication at each decision point. This consistency is essential for long term editorial credibility and responsible stewardship of the pancreatic research record.
Policy consistency across every manuscript decision is essential for long term editorial credibility and stakeholder trust.
Consistent application of policy language reduces ambiguity, supports fairness, and improves trust in editorial governance decisions.
Documented policy execution supports auditable editorial quality across complex decisions.
Consistent enforcement improves confidence in editorial fairness.
Documented decision rationale improves governance transparency and supports defensible editorial outcomes across complex cases.
