Governance · Research integrity · Editorial independence
Editorial policies for a reliable scholarly record
These policies define how manuscripts are assessed, how ethical concerns are handled, and how the journal corrects the record. Editorial decisions are independent of fees, services, memberships, and personal roles.
Peer review and editorial authority
JPMC uses single-blind peer review, with double-blind review available on request. Reviewers advise; the assigned editor remains responsible for the decision.
Initial assessment
The editorial office checks scope, completeness, ethical documentation, originality concerns, and basic methodological suitability.
Expert review
Suitable manuscripts are assigned to reviewers selected for relevant expertise and screened for conflicts of interest.
Editorial decision
The editor evaluates the manuscript, reviews, author responses, and journal policies. Review recommendations do not bind the editor.
Revision or closure
Authors receive a decision and, when revision is invited, a consolidated account of the issues that must be addressed.
Independence safeguard
Scientific merit, methodological integrity, ethical compliance, and scope determine editorial decisions. Payment, waiver status, membership, editing services, editorship, or reviewing confer no advantage in review or acceptance.
Research involving people, animals, and sensitive data
Authors must identify the applicable oversight framework and provide enough information for editors and reviewers to assess compliance.
State the approving ethics committee or institutional review board, approval or exemption identifier, and consent process. Identifiable information or images require appropriate publication consent. Public-health surveillance and secondary-data studies must explain the legal or ethical basis for access, linkage, privacy protection, and any consent waiver.
Prospectively registered interventional studies must provide the registry and identifier. The manuscript should report protocol deviations, primary outcomes, and the relationship between the registered plan and the submitted analysis.
Where animal work has a clear prevention-research fit, authors must state the approving body, applicable welfare standard, and measures taken to reduce harm and unnecessary use.
Authors must minimise disclosure risk in small populations, linked datasets, geospatial analyses, genomic data, and research involving stigmatised conditions. Claims about groups must be proportionate to the design and evidence.
Authorship, reporting, data, and competing interests
Transparency allows readers to understand who did the work, how it was funded, how the analysis was conducted, and what evidence supports the conclusions.
Authorship and contributions
Each author must meet the journal's authorship criteria, approve the submitted version, and accept accountability. Contributor roles and writing assistance must be disclosed.
Conflicts and funding
Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial, professional, intellectual, or personal interests relevant to the work. Funders' roles must be described.
Data and statistics
Provide a data-availability statement, justify restrictions, pre-specify primary analyses where applicable, report missing data and uncertainty, and avoid causal language unsupported by the design.
Reporting standards
Use the relevant EQUATOR guideline, including CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE, or a discipline-specific alternative, and submit the checklist when requested.
Images and source data
Adjustments must not obscure, add, remove, or misrepresent information. Editors may request uncropped images, underlying data, code, protocols, or audit documentation.
Originality
Plagiarism, duplicate publication, undisclosed text recycling, fabricated or falsified data, manipulated peer review, and inappropriate citation practices may lead to rejection or post-publication action.
Preprints, AI use, complaints, and corrections
Disclose any preprint, registry report, conference abstract, or related manuscript and provide the identifier or link. Prior dissemination must not be described as peer-reviewed publication unless it was independently reviewed.
AI tools cannot be authors. Authors remain responsible for accuracy, attribution, confidentiality, originality, and disclosure of substantive AI assistance. Editors and reviewers must not place confidential manuscript content into tools that cannot guarantee confidentiality, and must disclose permitted assistance to the editorial office.
A factual, evidence-based appeal or process complaint should be sent to the editorial office. It is assigned outside the original decision where practicable. An appeal does not guarantee external re-review or a different outcome.
The journal may issue a correction, retraction, withdrawal notice, update, or expression of concern when needed to keep the record accurate. Notices remain linked to the affected article and explain the reason without removing the history.
The journal may seek documentation, contact institutions or other journals, pause evaluation, or act after publication. Allegations are handled proportionately, confidentially, and with an opportunity for relevant parties to respond.
Copyright, licence, confidentiality, and archiving
Authors retain copyright. Published articles use the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence, subject to any clearly identified third-party material restrictions.
- Authors grant the publisher the right to publish and may reuse or deposit their article consistent with CC BY 4.0.
- Review manuscripts, reviewer identities, correspondence, and unpublished data are confidential within the applicable peer-review model.
- Editors may retain the minimum records required for decisions, integrity investigations, corrections, and legal or operational obligations.
- Article metadata and available full text are maintained through the publisher platform; no additional named preservation service is claimed here without verification.
Questions about a policy or an ethical concern?
Contact the editorial office before submission when a requirement is unclear, or as soon as a concern arises during review or after publication.
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Care · ISSN 2474-3585 · Aims & Scope · Editorial Policies · APC
Digital preservation
This journal’s content is committed to Portico, a not-for-profit digital-preservation archive run by ITHAKA (the organisation behind JSTOR). As articles are deposited they enter Portico’s permanent archive, so the scholarly record stays available for the long term — even if a title one day ceases to publish. Read our preservation policy.