Journal Description:

Conclusions in Medicine is committed to advancing the medical field by providing a platform for the dissemination of significant research findings and comprehensive reviews. The journal employs a rigorous peer-review process to ensure that all published work meets the highest standards of scientific rigor and clinical relevance. By fostering the exchange of knowledge between researchers and practitioners, Conclusions in Medicine aims to contribute to the ongoing improvement of healthcare.

The journal publishes original research articles, review papers, case studies, and technical notes. Special issues are regularly curated to address emerging topics or highlight landmark developments in medicine. As an open-access journal, Conclusions in Medicine ensures that its content is freely available to the global medical community, promoting the wide dissemination of knowledge and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration.

Whether you are a clinician, researcher, or healthcare policy maker, Conclusions in Medicine offers valuable insights and information to help you stay at the forefront of medical innovation and practice.

1. Ethical Standards for Publication

iConclusions Journals are committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in all aspects of the publication process. All authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the publication of research must adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

• Authorship and Contribution: Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the research should be listed as authors. All contributors must agree to the final version of the manuscript and its submission for publication.

• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and free from plagiarism. Proper citations must be provided for all sources and influences on the work. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarized content will be rejected or retracted.

• Data Integrity: Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data presented in their research. Data manipulation, fabrication, or falsification is strictly prohibited.

• Conflicts of Interest: All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the research, review, or editorial process. Full transparency is required to ensure impartiality and objectivity.

• Ethical Approval and Consent: Research involving human subjects, animals, or sensitive data must have received appropriate ethical approval. Authors must obtain informed consent from human participants and ensure compliance with relevant ethical guidelines.

2. Peer-Review Process

iConclusions Journals follow a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure the quality and validity of published research:

• Double-Blind Review: All submissions undergo a double-blind review process, where both the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential to ensure impartial evaluation.

• Reviewer Responsibilities: Reviewers are expected to provide constructive and timely feedback, maintain confidentiality, and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on scientific merit, originality, and relevance.

• Editorial Decision-Making: The editorial team is responsible for making the final decision on manuscript acceptance, rejection, or revision based on reviewer feedback and the journal’s scope and standards. Editors must maintain objectivity and avoid any conflicts of interest.

3. Open Access Policy

iConclusions Journals operate under an open-access model, ensuring that all published content is freely accessible to the global research community:

• Accessibility: All articles published in iConclusions Journals are freely available online without any subscription or access fees, promoting the widespread dissemination of knowledge.

• Licensing: Authors retain the copyright of their work and grant iConclusions Journals the right to publish under a Creative Commons license (typically CC BY), allowing others to share, adapt, and build upon the work with appropriate credit.

4. Publication Fees

To support the open-access model, iConclusions Journals may charge Article Processing Charges (APCs). The following policies apply:

• Transparency: APCs are clearly stated on the journal’s website, and authors are informed of any charges at the time of submission. There are no hidden fees.

• Waivers and Discounts: iConclusions Journals offer waivers or discounts on APCs for authors from low- and middle-income countries, as well as for cases of financial hardship, to ensure that financial barriers do not prevent the publication of quality research.

5. Retraction and Correction Policy

iConclusions Journals are committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. The following policies apply to corrections and retractions:

• Corrections: If errors are discovered in a published article that do not affect the overall conclusions, a correction will be published. Authors are encouraged to promptly report any errors in their work.

• Retractions: If a significant error or ethical violation (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication) is discovered, the article will be retracted. A retraction notice will be published to explain the reason for retraction, and the original article will be marked as retracted but remain accessible for transparency.

6. Privacy and Confidentiality

iConclusions Journals are committed to protecting the privacy and confidentiality of authors, reviewers, and editors:

• Author Privacy: Personal information provided by authors during submission will be kept confidential and used solely for the purpose of the publication process.

• Reviewer Anonymity: The identity of reviewers will be kept confidential unless they choose to disclose their identity with the authors’ consent.

• Data Protection: iConclusions Journals comply with applicable data protection laws and ensure that all personal data is securely stored and processed.

7. Misconduct and Appeals

iConclusions Journals take allegations of misconduct seriously. The following procedures are in place:

• Investigation: Allegations of research misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation) will be thoroughly investigated by the editorial team. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions, such as retraction, will be taken.

• Appeals: Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions. Appeals must be made in writing and will be reviewed by the editorial board, whose decision will be final.

8. Inclusivity and Diversity

iConclusions Journals are committed to promoting inclusivity and diversity in the research community:

• Diverse Representation: The journals encourage submissions from a diverse range of authors, including those from underrepresented groups and regions.

• Inclusive Language: Authors are encouraged to use inclusive language that respects the diversity of all people, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, or sexual orientation.

9. Compliance with Standards

iConclusions Journals adhere to international standards for scholarly publishing, including those set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These standards ensure the integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct of the publication process.

By adhering to these ethics and policies, iConclusions Journals aim to foster a trustworthy and inclusive environment for the publication and dissemination of high-quality research.

Peer Review Policy for iConclusions Journals

1. Overview of the Peer Review Process

iConclusions Journals are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic rigor and integrity through a transparent and fair peer-review process. The peer review process is a cornerstone of the journal’s commitment to quality, ensuring that all published research is thoroughly evaluated for its scientific merit, originality, and relevance. The following outlines the key aspects of the peer review policy:

• Double-Blind Review: iConclusions Journals employ a double-blind review process, meaning that the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This ensures an unbiased assessment of the manuscript, free from any personal or institutional biases.

• Editorial Screening: Upon submission, manuscripts are first screened by the editorial team to ensure they meet the journal’s scope, ethical guidelines, and quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk-rejected at this stage.

2. Selection of Reviewers

• Expertise: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and experience in the subject area of the manuscript. The editorial team ensures that reviewers have the necessary qualifications to provide a thorough and informed evaluation of the research.

• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide an impartial review. If a conflict is identified, an alternative reviewer will be assigned to the manuscript.

• Diversity: iConclusions Journals strive to engage a diverse pool of reviewers from different geographic regions, institutions, and backgrounds to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the manuscript.

3. Review Process and Criteria

• Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers assess manuscripts based on several key criteria, including the originality of the research, the validity of the methodology, the significance of the findings, the clarity of the presentation, and the relevance to the journal’s scope. Reviewers are also asked to provide feedback on the ethical conduct of the research, including adherence to relevant ethical guidelines.

• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive and detailed feedback to help authors improve the quality of their manuscript. This feedback should be specific, objective, and focused on the content of the manuscript rather than on the author(s).

• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the specified timeframe to ensure a prompt review process. Extensions may be granted under certain circumstances, but timeliness is emphasized to maintain the journal’s publication schedule.

4. Editorial Decision-Making

• Review Reports: The editorial team considers the reviewers’ reports, along with their own assessment of the manuscript, to make a decision on the manuscript’s suitability for publication. Possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.

• Revisions: If revisions are required, authors are given the opportunity to address the reviewers’ comments and resubmit their manuscript. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation or reviewed by the editorial team alone.

• Final Decision: The final decision on manuscript acceptance rests with the journal’s editor-in-chief or the editorial board. The decision is based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the authors’ response to feedback, and the overall quality and contribution of the manuscript.

5. Reviewer Anonymity and Confidentiality

• Anonymity: In the double-blind review process, the identities of the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors, and vice versa. Reviewers are also asked to refrain from disclosing their involvement in the review of a specific manuscript.

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and its contents as confidential, not to be shared with others without the express permission of the editorial team. Reviewers should not use any information from the manuscript for their own research or personal gain.

6. Handling Disputes and Appeals

• Dispute Resolution: In cases where there is a significant discrepancy between reviewers’ reports, or if an author disputes a review, the editorial team may seek additional opinions from other reviewers or make an independent assessment to resolve the issue.

• Appeals: Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions. Appeals must be submitted in writing, providing a detailed explanation of the grounds for the appeal. The appeal will be reviewed by the editorial board, and a final decision will be communicated to the author. The board’s decision on appeals is final.

7. Reviewer Recognition

• Acknowledgment: iConclusions Journals recognize the valuable contributions of reviewers through acknowledgments in the journal and, where applicable, through certificates of recognition.

• Reviewer Database: Reviewers are added to the journal’s database, and their expertise is recognized in future selection for relevant manuscripts.

By adhering to these peer-review policies, iConclusions Journals ensure the publication of high-quality, credible, and impactful research that meets the standards of the global academic community.