Only persons who contributed to the intellectual content of the paper should be listed as authors. Authors should meet all of the following criteria, and be able to take public responsibility for the content of the paper.
- Conceived and planned the work that led to the paper, or interpreted the evidence it presents, or both.
- Wrote the paper or reviewed successive versions, and took part in revising them.
- Approved the final version.
- Each author should have contributed sufficiently to the work to take public responsibility for the content.
Collecting and assembling data reported in a paper and performing routine investigations are not, by themselves, criteria for authorship.
The Journal of the Post Graduate Institute of Medicine requires that all authors declare any relevant financial and non-financial conflicts of interest and the journal publishes those that might influence a reader’s perception of the paper alongside the paper. The JPGIM requires that all funding sources of the research are declared and published and the role of the funding source in the conception, conduct, analysis and reporting of the research is stated and published.
Authors should adhere to relevant national and international laws and best practice guidelines in conducting research. Medical research in humans should be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The Journal of the Post Graduate Institute of Medicine requires approval of all studies involving human participants, human material or human data by an Ethics Review Committee (ERC) (or Institutional Review Board (IRB).
If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption).
In research involving human participants a statement regarding the consent procedure should be included in the manuscript.
Authors should submit a scanned copy of ethics approval letter at the time of submission.
Clinical trials should be registered in the Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry and the registration number should be quoted. http://www.slctr.lk/
Case reports and small case series with images of humans, signed consent for publication by the patient is required.
Authors should submit a scanned copy of letter of consent at the time of submission.
Experimental research on vertebrates or any regulated invertebrates must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available should have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. The Basel Declaration outlines fundamental principles to adhere to when conducting research in animals and the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) has also published ethical guidelines.
A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines and ethics approval (including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate) must be included in the manuscript. If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption and the reasons for the exemption).
Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild) including collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. The manuscript should include a statement specifying the appropriate permissions and/or licenses.
We have adopted the guidance produced by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, to deal with scientific misconduct at JPGIM on a case by case basis.
The following are some forms of scientific misconduct:
- Falsification of data
- Improper authorship
- Use of ideas of others without attribution
- Failure to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements
We take seriously all possible misconduct. If an editor has concerns that a submitted article describes something that might be considered to constitute misconduct in research, publication or professional behavior, we may discuss the case in confidence with the Ethics Review Committee of the Postgraduate institute of Medicine. Readers that suspect misconduct in a published article are encouraged to report this to the JPGIM.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Retractions are considered in cases of evidence of unreliable data or findings, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unethical research.
Authors have the right to appeal rejection of their manuscript. Appeals should be based on the scientific content of the manuscript and its suitability for publication rather than concerns about the process. Authors who wish to appeal against a rejection or make a complaint should write to the Editors giving reasons for the appeal. The Editorial Board’s decision regarding the appeal or complaint is final.
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of their work and results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of their work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Authors should ensure that they write and submit only their original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this is appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Any form of plagiarism is considered to be unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: See Authorship policy.
Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript, at the earliest stage possible. This should be indicated in the cover letter at the time of submission. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript to this effect. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial (honoraria, educational grants or other funding, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), as well as non-financial (personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript).
All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Authors should ensure that they acknowledge the work of others and should also cite publications that have been influenced their reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their duty to promptly notify the journal editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the authors should promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the accuracy of the paper.