Policy for Selection of Editors

Editors must hold a Postgraduate degree (PhD, FCPS, MPhil, or Equivalent) in a relevant medical or scientific field and demonstrate expertise in their specialty. This expertise should be evidenced by a substantial publication record in high-impact, peer-reviewed journals and experience in academic or research positions such as professorships or principal investigator roles. The appointment process involves a thorough review of nominations or applications by an editorial board selection committee, followed by a formal interview to assess suitability for the role. Final approval is granted by the Vice Chancellor of Rawalpindi Medical University. Editors are typically appointed for a term of 3–5 years, with the possibility of renewal based on performance and the needs of the journal. Annual performance reviews will be conducted to evaluate the quality of editorial decisions, timeliness, and overall contribution to the journal’s growth.

Roles and Responsibilities of Editors

Editors play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity, quality, and transparency of the journal's content. They are responsible for making publication decisions based on the manuscript’s scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal's scope. Editors must ensure a fair, transparent, and unbiased peer-review process and maintain confidentiality regarding submissions. They should recuse themselves from editorial duties if conflicts of interest arise and ensure that published research adheres to ethical guidelines. Editors are responsible for addressing issues such as plagiarism, data falsification, and redundant publication. If errors are identified post-publication, the journal will issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern as appropriate.

Initial Review and Preliminary Assessment

Editors are responsible for conducting a preliminary assessment of each manuscript to ensure that the research gap is clearly articulated and all prerequisites in the internal review checklist are complete before it is sent for peer review.  If a manuscript fails to adequately define the research gap, editors should consider returning it to the authors for revision prior to review. Internal Review Checklist (Appendix

Editorial Independence

Editors should make decisions based solely on the intellectual merit and relevance of the work to the journal's scope, without interference from publishers or external parties. Editorial independence is critical to maintaining the integrity and credibility of the publication process. We are committed to maintaining the integrity of our editorial decision-making processes, ensuring they remain entirely independent of commercial interests.

To preserve this editorial independence, all editorial decisions, as well as any concerns or complaints regarding these decisions, must be addressed strictly within the established editorial structures of the publication.

These structures include but are not limited to, editors, editors-in-chief, editorial boards, review boards, and ombudsmen or equivalent bodies responsible for editorial governance.

Any deviation from the strict application of this principle in any specific situation could ultimately compromise the foundational integrity of editorial independence.

Confidentiality

Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. Information regarding a manuscript should not be shared with anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Conflict of Interest

Editors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a personal, professional, or financial interest. Editors should also ensure that reviewers disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

Ethical Review of Submissions

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all research involving human subjects or animals has been conducted in accordance with ethical guidelines. Manuscripts should only be accepted if the research complies with ethical standards, including obtaining necessary approvals and informed consent.

Transparency in Peer Review

Editors should ensure that the peer-review process is transparent and fair. They should communicate clearly with authors and reviewers about the review process, criteria for decisions, and the responsibilities of reviewers.

Addressing Misconduct

Editors must take appropriate action if they suspect or receive allegations of research misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, and unethical experimentation. This may involve consulting with the publisher, retracting the manuscript, or informing relevant authorities.

Post-Publication Responsibilities

Editors should be vigilant about post-publication issues, such as errors or ethical concerns raised about published papers. They should work with authors and publishers to correct the literature through errata, retractions, or other means, ensuring that the published record is accurate and trustworthy.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI):

At JRMC, all editors are committed to fostering a diverse, equitable, and inclusive environment in academic publishing. To enhance representation, we will actively recruit editorial board members and peer reviewers from diverse backgrounds, including women, racial minorities and people with disabilities. We encourage inclusive research that addresses diverse populations and settings, ensuring fair evaluation of studies involving underrepresented groups. All editors and reviewers receive regular training to recognize and mitigate unconscious bias and promote inclusivity in editorial decision-making and peer review processes. Additionally, we will adopt transparent and fair peer review practices, including guidelines that discourage discriminatory comments, and consider double-blind reviews to reduce bias related to the author’s identity. To track progress, JRMC regularly collects and reports demographic data of authors, reviewers, and editorial board members and sets measurable goals to promote a more diverse and inclusive environment.

Policy for Sharing information among Editors in chiefs

Journal editors should share information among Editors-in-Chief (EiCs) only when it is necessary to address suspected research misconduct, ensuring such sharing is essential to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. Initial investigations should be conducted without sharing information unless there is a clear indication that multiple journals are affected. When sharing information becomes necessary, it should be limited to those EiCs who may have pertinent information, and only the minimum amount of information required should be disclosed. The shared content should be strictly factual, avoiding any conjecture or inference, and should include a statement clarifying that the information does not constitute a judgment of wrongdoing but is intended to assist in the fair resolution of the case.

Confidentiality must be preserved at all times. Editors should use secure communication methods, such as marked emails, and take steps to prevent unauthorized forwarding of information. These practices should be consistently applied to both unpublished and published works, acknowledging that while published data is in the public domain, the principles of careful and responsible handling remain the same. These guidelines are in line with the best practices recommended by COPE to ensure ethical and effective communication among EiCs.

Guidelines for Editorial Board Members of JRMC

Editorial board members of JRMC are expected to adhere to the following guidelines to ensure ethical and effective participation. Their roles and responsibilities include assistance in editorial decisions, identifying reviewers, recruiting new reviewers, critically reviewing volumes before publishing, writing commentaries, and attending board meetings. The duration of their appointment will be for a period of two years after approval from the Patron with renewal based on performance review. The Patron can terminate the contract in cases of academic misconduct. To avoid conflicts of interest, members must declare all potential conflicts, including concurrent editorships and memberships on other editorial boards. Editorial board members mustn't hold decision-making positions in multiple journals that have similar aims and compete for the same content, as this could lead to conflicts of roles and commitments. During recruitment, JRMC will consider whether potential members' multiple roles might overburden them, create conflicts of interest, or limit diversity of opinion.

Article Correction, Retraction and Removal Policy

Any scientific record that requires correction, will be notified and will be permanently linked to the article, providing transparency for the scientific community.

Authors who discover an error in their published article must contact the journal as soon as possible using the contact details listed on the journal’s home page.

The corresponding author will be responsible for sharing the details of the error with the journal. The senior manager of JRMC will review the proposed correction, together with any accompanying data or information. They may send the proposed correction for further peer review. The  Editor of JRMC will determine the appropriate mechanism to correct the article.

Article Correction

A Corrigendum will be issued when it's necessary to correct a mistake or omission that does not affect the article's integrity or findings. The authors are responsible for drafting the Corrigendum, and all authors must agree to its publication. The Corrigendum will be connected to the original article it corrects.

If an error occurs during the publication process and needs correction, then JRMC will issue an Erratum. This Erratum will also be linked to the article it corrects.

Expressions of Concern

The editors of JRMC may issue an Expression of Concern under the following circumstances:

• They receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct that has not been resolved through investigation and warrants informing readers.
• They believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication was or will be unfair, biased, or inconclusive.
• An investigation is ongoing, but the final judgment will take a considerable amount of time.

This Expression of Concern can be temporary or permanent. If a temporary notice is issued, it will typically be followed by a further update—potentially including a permanent Expression of Concern, a retraction or removal, or a notice of exoneration presented as an Editor’s Note—once the investigation is concluded and the editor/s have made their final decision.

Article Withdrawal

JRMC may withdraw Articles-in-Press, which are early versions of articles accepted for publication but not yet finalized. The key reasons for withdrawal include:

1. Errors in the Article: If significant errors are found in the content.
2. Duplicate Publication: If the article is discovered to be an accidental duplicate of another already published article.
3. Policy Breaches: If there is a breach of publishing policies, such as multiple submissions, false authorship claims, plagiarism, or fraudulent data.
4. Editorial or Production Errors: If the article was published prematurely due to an editorial or production mistake.

When an Article-in-Press is withdrawn, the original content will be removed and replaced with a notice explaining the withdrawal, along with a link to JRMC’s policy on Article-in-Press Withdrawal.

 

Article Retraction:

Articles may be retracted to address significant errors that affect the validity of the research, where the errors are too extensive for a simple correction, or due to violations of the journal's policies, such as duplicate submissions, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, data fraud, or similar issues.

JRMC’s editorial team will consider retracting an article under several circumstances:

• There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether due to major errors (like miscalculations or experimental mistakes) or misconduct (such as data fabrication or falsification, including image manipulation).
• The article involves plagiarism.
• The findings were previously published elsewhere without proper attribution, disclosure to the editor, permission for republication, or justification for the redundancy.
• The article contains material or data that the authors did not have permission to publish.
• There has been a copyright violation or another serious legal issue, such as libel or breach of privacy.
• The research reported was unethical or violated JRMC’s ethical policies regarding research involving human or animal subjects.
• The peer-review process or editorial process was compromised.
• There are concerns about the sale of authorship.
• There is evidence of citation manipulation.
• The authors failed to disclose a significant conflict of interest that would have impacted the interpretation of the work or influenced editorial or peer review decisions.
• Any other breach of the JRMC’s publishing policies that causes the editor to lose confidence in the validity or integrity of the article.

Best practices for retractions, and followed by JRMC, include:

• Publishing a retraction notice titled “Retraction: [article title],” signed by the editor and, if appropriate, the authors, in a subsequent issue of the journal. This notice is paginated and listed in the table of contents.
• Creating an electronic link between the retraction notice and the original article.
• Displaying a screen with the retraction note before the online version of the article, with the option for the reader to proceed to the article itself.
• Retaining the original article unchanged except for a watermark on each page of the PDF indicating that it has been retracted.
• Removing the HTML version of the article.

These procedures ensure transparency in the retraction process while maintaining the integrity of the academic record.

 

Article Removal

An article may need to be removed from a journal's online archive in rare cases, given the importance of preserving the scholarly record as a permanent and largely unchanged account of academic work. Removal will only occur under specific conditions:

1. Defamation or Legal Infringement: If the article is defamatory or violates legal rights, and retracting it is not enough to address the issue.
2. Court Order: If the article is or is likely to become the subject of a court order.
3. Health Risks: The content of the article could lead to serious health risks if followed.

In such cases, the article's metadata (such as the title and authors) will remain, but the article's text will be replaced with a notice stating that it has been removed for legal reasons.

Article Replacement

If an article might pose a serious health risk if followed, the authors may opt to retract it and replace it with a corrected version. In these cases, the usual retraction procedures will apply, but the retraction notice in the database will include a link to the corrected article and a history of the document.

Custom Publications

Custom publications and commercial activities, referred to as "custom publications," encompass various publications such as print products, electronic services, conferences, and related activities that receive partial or full sponsorship from third parties. JRMC’s level of involvement in these publications can differ, including aspects like production, hosting, and editorial support, based on the specifics of the agreement.

Custom publications include commercial article reprints, journal supplements, special editions, compendia, and other tailored publications and book programs and may include materials from third parties.

Transparency for Custom Publications

Full disclosure of origin and funding

Full, clear, and prominent disclosure must be provided regarding the origins of the content, the roles of all editors, authors, and sponsors, as well as any vested interests and conflicts of interest related to JRMC. This applies to all content delivered in print, electronically, or during face-to-face conference activities. Specifically, the following should be disclosed:

• The source of the content and any sponsorship received by its editors, authors, or the original research.
• Sponsorship details for the distribution of custom publications (e.g., "This [xxx] is distributed with support from [company].")
• Any selection or modification of content, including cases where content is not reproduced in full or is chosen from multiple sources.

Policy for JRMC Supplement Journals

The development and distribution of supplements and special editions of JRMC will adhere to existing guidelines, which include:

• Obtaining editorial approval
• Following ICMJE peer review standards
• Providing complete and visible disclosure of authorship and research funding
• Maintaining journal branding

For any questions about the interpretation of this policy, please contact the JRMC Office.